Mark Takano (D-CA)
Supporting the goals and ideals of Glisten's (formerly GLSEN's) 2026 Day of Silence in bringing attention to anti-LGBTQI+ bullying, harassment, discrimination, and other forms of victimization faced by individuals in schools, and calling communities across the country to action to demand equal educational opportunity, basic civil rights protections, and freedom from erasure for all students, particularly LGBTQI+ young people, in K-12 schools.
A Democratic resolution with 8 Democratic cosponsors · See all 8 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
A House resolution is the House speaking for itself: stating a position, honouring someone, or setting its own rules. Adopting it is the whole process. Once the House agrees to it, it is officially the House's word; it is not a law, so the Senate and the President have no part in it.
What this bill would do
This resolution supports the goals and ideals of Glisten's 2026 Day of Silence. It aims to bring attention to the bullying, harassment, and discrimination faced by LGBTQI+ individuals in K-12 schools. The resolution calls for communities to demand equal educational opportunities and basic civil rights protections. It specifically highlights the needs of LGBTQI+ young people, including those who are transgender, nonbinary, intersex, Black, Indigenous, people of color, and people with disabilities. Finally, it encourages local and state agencies to adopt policies that prohibit discrimination so students can focus on learning.
Yes· 3 of 17
- Scored +10
Would LGBTQ people be better off under this?
The entire purpose of the resolution is to support LGBTQI+ students and combat their victimization.
- Scored +8
Does this expand the rights of LGBTQ people?
The bill explicitly supports protections and equal educational opportunities for LGBTQI+ individuals.
- Scored +7
Would children be better off under this?
Advocates for safer and more inclusive K-12 environments for children.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Safety and Learning Focus: By encouraging states, cities, and local agencies to prohibit bullying and discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, or sex characteristics, the resolution seeks to create schools where individuals can focus on learning. (Resolution, Section 3)
-
Support for LGBTQI+ Students: The resolution aims to address the challenges faced by LGBTQI+ students, such as verbal and physical harassment, to promote safer and more inclusive learning environments. (Whereas clauses)
-
Mental Health and Educational Outcomes: The text notes that developing in positive school climates free from harassment leads to greater mental well-being and improved educational and life outcomes. (Whereas clauses)
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No specific negative impacts or burdens for individuals or groups are explicitly stated within the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — The entire purpose of the resolution is to support LGBTQI+ students and combat their victimization. Would children be better off under this? — Advocates for safer and more inclusive K-12 environments for children. Would students be better off under this? — Promotes safer, non-discriminatory learning environments for all K-12 students. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Specifically addresses the exacerbated harassment faced by Black LGBTQI+ students. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Specifically addresses the exacerbated harassment faced by Indigenous LGBTQI+ students. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Explicitly calls for inclusive environments that affirm people with disabilities. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Supports the rights and safety of students in their formative educational years. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Addresses protections for people of color within the LGBTQI+ community. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Addresses protections for people of color within the LGBTQI+ community. Would women be better off under this? — Advocates against sexism and for gender identity protections. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Provides support for marginalized groups who often face compounded economic and social challenges.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this expand the rights of LGBTQ people? — The bill explicitly supports protections and equal educational opportunities for LGBTQI+ individuals. Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated? — It advocates for protections based on gender identity and sex characteristics. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The bill specifically mentions the intersectional challenges faced by Black, Indigenous, and people of color in LGBTQI+ contexts. Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — It explicitly mentions the need for inclusive environments for people with disabilities. Does this shorten or soften prison sentences? — The bill mentions reducing the 'school-to-prison pipeline' for marginalized students.
- Healthcare
- Does this make mental health care easier to get? — The resolution acknowledges the mental health struggles of LGBTQI+ youth and advocates for safer environments to improve well-being.
- 6/4/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/20/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/21/2026
- 5 Cosponsors added.
- 4/9/2026
- Submitted in House
- Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Joyce BeattyDemocrat · Ohio
Judy ChuDemocrat · California
Angie CraigDemocrat · Minnesota
Josh GottheimerDemocrat · New Jersey
Pramila JayapalDemocrat · Washington
Raja KrishnamoorthiDemocrat · Illinois
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Lateefah SimonDemocrat · California