Initiative Measure 442Constitutional amendment · Citizen initiative
Require sex-based school teams
Explain it like I'm 5
Schools would label teams male, female, or co-ed. Students classified as male could not play on female teams, like putting a rule about team categories into the state's most permanent rulebook.
Yes vote
The Nebraska Constitution would require covered schools to designate teams by sex or as co-ed and bar male students from female teams.
No vote
The Constitution would not add these sports-team requirements.
The question to ask yourself
Should sex-based eligibility rules be locked into the Constitution, or is ordinary state law enough?
The case for
- Supporters say separate female teams protect fair competition and athletic opportunities.
- A constitutional rule would make the policy consistent and harder to repeal.
- Supporters say it protects female roster spots, awards, scholarships, and advancement opportunities.
Backed by: Fairness for Girls, Nebraska Family Alliance, Republican Party of Nebraska
The case against
- Opponents say the measure excludes transgender students and constitutionalizes discrimination.
- A constitutional rule would be harder to adjust as evidence, school practices, or athletic rules change.
- Critics say individual cases should not be governed by one inflexible statewide rule.
Opposed by: Fairness for All, ACLU of Nebraska, OutNebraska, Nebraska Appleseed, Democratic Party of Nebraska
- Money
- No official statewide cost or tax estimate is stated; potential implementation and legal costs are not estimated.
- Don't be misled
- It is misleading to describe 442 as creating the first restriction, because Nebraska already has a similar statutory policy; 442 would make the rule constitutional and harder to change.