Nancy Mace Proposes the TRANS MICE Act Targeting Federal Funding for Transgender-Related Animal Experiments

On July 17, 2025, Representative Nancy Mace (R-SC) introduced House Bill 4512, known as the TRANS MICE Act, to the U.S. House of Representatives. The bill seeks to eliminate federal funding for animal research "involving transgender-related issues," with Mace and several Republican cosponsors publicly supporting the measure as a bid to end what they describe as “wasteful and ideological” experiments.

The bill follows a February 2025 congressional subcommittee hearing led by Mace entitled “Transgender Lab Rats and Poisoned Puppies: Oversight of Taxpayer Funded Animal Cruelty.” At the hearing, witnesses including Justin Goodman of the White Coat Waste Project, Paul A. Locke of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and Elizabeth Baker of Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine criticized the use of federal grants for animal experiments, especially those perceived as having ideological or controversial underpinnings.

The TRANS MICE Act specifically targets research involving non-human vertebrate animals (e.g., mice, rats, birds) funded by federal agencies, where the research relates to transgender topics. In a press statement, Mace asserted: “Americans are rightfully tired of seeing their tax dollars spent on wasteful experiments disguised as research.” Supporters, such as Justin Goodman, argue that the bill will protect animals and taxpayer interests and claim that such research is both “disturbing” and “wasteful”.

However, reporting from LGBTQ+ outlets notes that there is scant evidence of any ongoing federally funded experiments specifically involving “transgender mice” or similar models. Critics argue that the bill addresses a largely nonexistent issue and may serve more as a political statement than a response to an actual funding problem.

LGBTQ+ organizations and advocacy groups have voiced concern over the framing and intent of the bill. Many worry that elevating “transgender animal experiments” as a political focus can contribute to stigmatization and misunderstanding of transgender issues in scientific research. For example, The Advocate reports that most federally funded animal research related to gender identity typically focuses on basic science (such as hormone pathways or neurological development) and does not involve attempts to create “transgender mice”.

Advocates note that bills like the TRANS MICE Act can have broader chilling effects on legitimate research into gender and sexuality, including studies that might help advance medical care for transgender people. “We’re concerned that vague language in legislation like this can be used to halt scientific progress and reinforce harmful stereotypes,” said a spokesperson from a national LGBTQ+ medical association.

The TRANS MICE Act fits into a larger pattern of legislative efforts focused on restricting or scrutinizing research involving gender identity and sexual orientation. According to testimony at the February subcommittee hearing, animal research accounts for a significant portion of federal scientific spending, with wide-ranging topics from disease prevention to behavioral studies. However, the specific targeting of “transgender-related” topics is unprecedented and has raised alarms among researchers and advocates who fear it may lead to further politicization of science.

Elizabeth Baker, Director of Research Policy at Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, testified that while animal welfare is important, “legislation should be based on scientific merit, not political ideology”.

As of August 21, 2025, the TRANS MICE Act remains in committee and has not yet advanced to a floor vote. While the bill has garnered support from select advocacy groups focused on animal welfare and government spending oversight, it faces strong opposition from scientific and LGBTQ+ organizations who argue that it risks stigmatizing transgender people and undermining valuable research.

The debate underscores the ongoing tension between political oversight, scientific freedom, and the fight for LGBTQ+ inclusion and accurate representation in public discourse. Many in the LGBTQ+ community continue to advocate for evidence-based policy and the protection of research that could benefit transgender people’s health and well-being.