A new bill would enact sweeping gender-based restrictions on bathrooms, locker rooms and dormitories on Idaho’s college campuses — including some restrictions that the sponsor didn’t intend. 

Bathrooms, locker rooms and dorms must be designated “for the exclusive use by either females or males,” says the bill from Rep. Barbara Ehardt, R-Idaho Falls. The legislation applies to two- and four-year public colleges and universities as well as domestic violence shelters and prisons.

Transgender college students — and other students whose gender identity doesn’t match their birth sex — would be barred from using bathrooms, locker rooms and dorm rooms that align with their preferred gender. Multi-occupant, gender-neutral restrooms would also be disallowed.

“This piece of legislation is continuing that which Idaho has essentially undertaken and that is the protection of girls and women,” Ehardt told the House Judiciary and Rules Committee, which voted to introduce the bill Thursday. “This continues to protect women’s single-sex spaces.”

Ehardt in 2020 sponsored a law that prohibited transgender women from participating in female sports. In 2023, the Idaho Legislature passed a law requiring that K-12 public school restrooms and changing facilities be separated by birth sex, barring transgender students from using their preferred facility. Both laws drew constitutional challenges.

Ehardt’s latest proposal may be short-lived, however. When reporters questioned specific provisions following Thursday’s hearing, Ehardt said that several potential effects were unintentional. This includes a line that would prohibit men from visiting women’s dorms and women from visiting men’s dorms. That wasn’t the intent, Ehardt said.

“The intent is that you would not find yourself forced to room with someone of the opposite sex…A brand new freshman coming from Ririe, Idaho, wouldn’t accidentally find out that their dorm mate in the women’s dorms was actually male.” 

Ehardt said she may bring a followup bill clarifying this and other provisions. But most of the bill likely would remain intact. 

The proposal shouldn’t come as a surprise to college and university administrators, Ehardt said.

“There’s been discussion on multiple things through the last couple years where issues such as this has come up…That’s not to say that there’s always complete agreement,” she said.

The State Board of Education does not have a policy that addresses housing for transgender students, spokesman Mike Keckler said Thursday. These policies are set by college and university administrators. 

Each of the state’s four-year institutions allow students to request “gender-inclusive” or “gender-neutral” housing, according to the websites for the University of Idaho, Boise State University, Idaho State University and Lewis-Clark State College. 

Gender-neutral housing is “for anyone who wants to live with people with whom they feel comfortable — no matter their gender,” according to Lewis-Clark’s website. 

Ehardt’s bill also includes a private cause of action that would give someone standing to file a lawsuit for violations of the restrictions on bathrooms, locker rooms and dorms. House Democrats objected to this provision during Thursday’s hearing.

“I’ve got real concerns about turning average Idahoans into the bathroom police,” said Rep. Chris Mathias of Boise. “I think this is a really dangerous road to go down.”

Task force endorses anti-DEI bill

An anti-DEI bill could be headed to a Statehouse committee for a formal hearing.

After some heated discussion, a House-Senate task force endorsed a bill to ban diversity, equity and inclusion offices and officers and diversity training from the state’s campuses. The DEI task force couldn’t act on the bill officially, since it isn’t a standing legislative committee. The task force could only recommend the bill to House and Senate leadership.

That recommendation came Thursday afternoon, in a party-line vote.

But before the vote, the bill’s author and the task force’s lone Democrat skirmished over the bill’s intent — and campus freedom of speech.

Sen. Ben Toews said his bill would forbid required DEI classes. Colleges and universities would still be able to offer classes through a social justice “lens,” but they would be electives.

“There’s nothing being banned,” said Toews, R-Coeur d’Alene. “The courses are still there.”

But Sen. Melissa Wintrow, D-Boise, said the bill would put the state in the untenable position of deciding what should and should not be allowed in required classes.

“We’re going to chill free speech instead of actually embracing it,” said Wintrow, who has worked in higher education for more than 30 years. “I think people are scared.”

Toews and Wintrow continued to debate at length, while the task force’s remaining six members remained largely silent.

“There is chilling speech happening on our higher education campuses already,” said Toews, who argued that conservative campus speech is more often targeted.

“You describe how I feel in the Legislature every day,” Wintrow said. “I know my views are not in the majority. And sometimes I’m punished because of it.”

Toews made several changes from the initial version of his bill, released two weeks ago.

Some of the changes would make the bill even more restrictive. It would ban “preferential treatment” based on race, gender, color, ethnicity or national origin — both in the admission and hiring process.

But in the rewrite, students, alumni and staff could no longer seek financial damages from a college or university that violates the law. Students, alumni and staff could still seek a limited “private cause of action” — an injunction against the school.

The attorney general could still seek civil penalties against a college or university that breaks the law. Penalties could be up to 2% of a school’s budget — not the mandatory 2% cut proposed in the original bill.

Displaying flags of ‘hostile’ nations prohibited in bill rewrite

Rep. Ted Hill, R-Eagle, Thursday introduced a new version of his proposal to bar public school educators from displaying most flags in public school classrooms.

The rewrite clarified one of the exceptions to the proposed rule: Flags of recognized foreign nations are allowed as long as the U.S. isn’t engaged in a “hostile action” with the country.

House Education Committee members honed in on how “hostile” should be interpreted. It’s not defined in the bill. The United States hasn’t officially declared war since World War II, Hill said, but “hostilities” could include more recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

School boards would be responsible for determining which nation’s flags would qualify, Hill said. The bill doesn’t include penalties for failing to comply, he noted.

“It’s almost like I’m leaning on (their) reasonability and the patriotism, and the school board would decide…what is the right thing to do.”

House Education last week sent the former version of the bill to the full House after a public hearing.

On Thursday, the committee voted to advance the new version to the House floor without a public hearing. Reps. Monica Church and Chris Mathias, Democrats from Boise, opposed the motion.

New bill would downsize school safety board

Rep. Ted Hill also introduced a bill that would downsize the state’s school safety advisory board. 

The 13-member School Safety and Security Advisory Board has struggled to reach a quorum due to its size, Hill told the House Education Committee. The bill would eliminate more than half of its seats. 

“This administrative change should make it more successful,” said Hill, R-Eagle. 

The bill would remove seats reserved for: 

• A public school parent.
• A public school teacher. 
• A public school superintendent. 
• A public school trustee. 
• A representative from the Idaho State Police. 
• A representative from the Idaho Chiefs of Police Association.
• A representative from the Idaho Sheriffs’ Association.
• A representative from the Idaho Office of Emergency Management. 
• A representative from the Idaho Fire Chiefs Association.

The new, six-member board would consist of: 

• An emergency responder, appointed by the governor.
• A member at large, appointed by the governor.
• The state superintendent or a designee.
• A State Board of Education appointee.
• A member of the Idaho House.
• A member of the Idaho Senate.

The bill would also establish two-year terms for all members of the board. Each member could continue to serve after their terms expire “at the pleasure of the respective appointing body.” 

Hill said he would be “more than happy” to serve on the board. “I hope the governor will pick me. I would love to be on it.”

Bill requiring parental notification of bullying resurfaces

The House Education Committee also introduced a bill requiring parental notification for “serious” instances of bullying.

It’s a follow-up to Rep. Chris Mathias’ bill from last session, which the House narrowly rejected. Opponents felt that the former bill was “too overreaching” by requiring schools to send information home “every single time there was an incident of bullying,” Mathias said.

The new bill would direct school districts to implement a policy notifying parents — of both the victim and aggressor — when a bullying incident rises to the level of suspension.

“When something bad happens, it’s not enough for us to just let the state know,” Mathias said. “We also need to let these parents know, so they can take appropriate steps to make sure this kind of stuff doesn’t happen again.”

Mathias introduced a second bill that would clean up a section of law related to school safety.

The legislation would expand on requirements for educator background checks, emergency operations plans and emergency training.  Much of the requirements are existing, Mathias said, but the bill would add a public records exemption for emergency plans and training.

Public safety and education groups that weighed in said it “would be helpful if we weren’t forced to release what our emergency plans are,” Mathias told House Education, which voted to introduce the bill. “Everyone thought that that was pretty reasonable.”