LGBTQ+ advocates are speaking out against several anti-LGBTQ+ bills introduced by the Republican supermajority in Idaho’s legislature, including one that would legalize anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination by local businesses.

The bills include H.B. 607, a bill banning trans people from using the correct restrooms and changing rooms in government buildings and public businesses, and H.B. 606, a bill criminalizing trans people from using facilities that match their gender identity; H.B. 516, a “don’t say gay” bill banning LGBTQ+ instruction in public school classrooms; H.B. 561, a bill banning the Pride flag from being flown at city and county government buildings; and H.B. 557, a bill blocking local LGBTQ+ anti-discrimination protections.

Related

Republicans are now coming for marriage equality in this state’s “slate of hate”

H.B. 607: A ban on trans-inclusive public accommodations

“Requiring individuals to share restrooms and changing facilities with members of the other sex infringes on their interest in privacy and generates potential embarrassment, shame, and psychological injury to those individuals,” and “creates real privacy and safety concerns by increasing the likelihood of sexual assault, molestation, rape, voyeurism, and exhibitionism, H.B. 607 states.

Never Miss a Beat

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay ahead of the latest LGBTQ+ political news and insights.
Subscribe to our Newsletter today

As such, the bill repeats right-wing anti-trans rhetoric that vilifies trans people as a threat to others. No evidence has shown that trans-inclusive public accommodation laws result in increased sexual violence against others, and state laws already forbid assault against others in public spaces.

The bill would allow anyone who encounters a trans person in a government restroom or changing facility to sue the government entity for $10,000 and personal damages.

H.B. 606: A bill criminalizing trans people in public facilities

H.B. 606 would make it a misdemeanor for a trans person to use any sex-segregated restroom or changing room that matches their gender identity. A second conviction within five years would result in a felony charge with up to five years’ imprisonment as a punishment.

H.B. 516: An anti-LGBTQ+ education bill

H.B. 516 would not only ban school lessons acknowledging the existence of LGBTQ+ people, it would also allow parents to withdraw their children from any lessons with content that “harms the child or impairs the parents’ firmly held beliefs, values, or principles,” and require educators to out queer students to their parents (or, as the bill puts it, to report any change in “a student’s mental, emotional, or physical health or well-being”). It would prevent school districts from adopting policies forbidding the forced outing of queer students to their parents.

The legislation would also forbid educators from issuing student surveys that ask about a student’s “sexuality, sex, religion, personal political beliefs, mental or psychological problems, [or] personal family information” unless first approved by each student’s parent. Such surveys can help educators better understand students pyscho-social needs and interests.

H.B. 561: A Pride flag ban

H.B. 561 would charge local government entities $2,000 per day per flag if they fly any flag other than the U.S. flag, state flags, military flags, or recognized tribal flags.

The bill was introduced directly in response to the Boise City Council adopting a version of the Pride flag as an official city flag last year after the Idaho state legislature passed a law in April saying that government entities could only fly local, state, and federal flags.

H.B. 557: A bill legalizing anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination

More than a dozen Idaho cities and counties have LGBTQ+ non-discrimination protections. H.B. 557, which was drafted by the anti-LGBTQ+ Idaho Family Policy Center, would forbid local governments from passing or enforcing any ordinances protecting groups not already protected by state law. Idaho state law doesn’t explicitly list sexual orientation or gender identity as characteristics protected from discrimination.

The Idaho Family Policy Center has explicitly said that LGBTQ+ non-discrimination protections force business owners — particularly “bakers, photographers, florists, graphic designers, and wedding venue operators” — to “participate in same-sex wedding ceremonies and pride festivals,” which conflicts with their religious beliefs, KIVI reported. As such, the bill seeks to allow businesses to refuse to serve LGBTQ+ individuals, organizations, and events.

LGBTQ+ community members and allies speak out

Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates opposed the ban on local LGBTQ+ anti-discrimination ordinances, stating, “Local communities know their people, their needs, and their values better than anyone else. When the state strips local leaders of the ability to respond to issues and protect their residents, it isn’t preserving neutrality – it’s government overreach at best.”

Boise Mayor Lauren McLean also opposed the law, saying, “House Bill 557 will expose cities to lawsuits and financial penalties for adopting policies that reflect local values and priorities, at the cost of taxpayer dollars. It will weaken the competitive edge that Boise’s businesses and economy have in a growing landscape. It is yet another example of Idaho legislators seeking to remove local control over our communities…. Everyone in Boise deserves to be treated fairly.”

Nikson Mathews, chair of the Idaho Queer Caucus, said, “For decades, our beloved queer elders asked for a simple update to the Idaho Human Rights Act — just four words: sexual orientation and gender identity. But lawmakers refused. And over time, legislators have gone from refusing to protect us—to actively stripping protections away. That isn’t just escalation. It is centralized government control—expanding state authority at the expense of personal liberty. And it impacts every person in this state.”

Pocatello City Council Member Hayden Paulsen said, “This supermajority is breaking the social contract. Small government is no more. They want top-down authoritarianism that harms local governments. This legislature’s contempt for our cities, local control, is hypocrisy at its finest.”

Jenna Damron, statewide LGBTQ+ rights strategist with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Idaho, said, “These NDOs [non-discrimination ordinances] aren’t just about fairness; they are vital for promoting economic growth and safeguarding local governments’ autonomy to create policies that truly reflect the values and needs of their communities.”

Idaho state Rep. Annie Henderson Haws (D) called the anti-trans public accommodations bill “a proof nightmare” and said that DNA tests, photographic proof in bathrooms, and restroom monitors would be needed to enforce the bill, the Idaho Capital Sun reported.

State Rep. Stephanie Mickelsen (R), also denounced the anti-trans public accommodations bill, saying, “It puts a bounty on the government of $10,000 just simply for somebody being in the wrong room — not for them having done anything, but just having been in the wrong room,” adding, “I think that this bill is actually a way to intimidate and harass private businesses to push someone’s particular agenda.”

Nikson Mathew, the transgender chair of the Idaho Democratic Queer Caucus, said, “These bills … police public spaces, censor speech, override local control, take away parental rights, restrict privacy and target LGBTQ+ people and families… I just want to say to every queer and trans Idahoan: We deserve safety, we deserve joy and love, and to exist without our humanity being debated every legislative session.”

Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.