[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6090244,"mediaKeyId","2869122-3b3004fcdeb037233f6242781e7e91a7","parentId",2869122,"title","Senate debate questions retroactive power in bill targeting foreign adversary land ownership","audioSeconds",955,"startMs",716175,"endMs",1671855,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2869122-3b3004fcdeb037233f6242781e7e91a7&start=716&end=1671","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2869122-3b3004fcdeb037233f6242781e7e91a7/thumbnail_716175.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6090244/Idaho/Senate-debate-questions-retroactive-power-in-bill-targeting-foreign-adversary-land-ownership","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6090244-8516eca323e0a3ee6423ebb3353f54f6/orig.mp4?Expires=1771192716&Signature=h7~ttmohMRw9Z-9XG9BC8tauBrmQuSS1Zv-6J5HpL9dOez2IXkRaSnC7sesgOzqNoRKmlh36PRvy94YxrKWSyBnSzppiYplk~Cp11DQlADiSOi9SFgr07pqgIjlHrUBZ~nr5iOj24dVHARTaXdYPCXG978fNaHJmsD7J8fJ~tT3wG-SJbKpmZeCyFBjy0kV6VE9kYH~CmdK8-QUYh7Fni798kpWEP9GecLob5vLLh3xuF4qEFkIlzCHmsl9LsVHTmOU0Ow~zVX3EU~kB4m9RbkfHCYxLGBwObKqHoUOjA~hSf4OEHXaac2XdlR2-orB6r2uWuDqablKlWjV1HAXW0g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Senate of Idaho","date","2025-04-02T00:00:00Z","article","House Bill 3-56, introduced April 2 in the Idaho Senate, would expand state prohibitions on foreign ownership to cover agricultural land, water rights and mining claims when the owner is a listed “foreign adversary” and could require sale or judicial foreclosure if assets are not divested within six months.

The bill’s sponsor, Senator Keiser, told colleagues the measure “expands on current code ... related to foreign governments and prohibitions of purchasing forest land” and would add agricultural land, water and mineral rights to the list of covered assets. He said the bill would require a controlling foreign-adversary owner to sell within six months or face judicial foreclosure and that the measure excludes entities that hold a current national-security waiver, citing the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States as an example.

Why it matters: supporters argued the measure is aimed at protecting military training areas and other state interests from surveillance or interference by hostile states, while critics warned it could reach back into completed, lawful transactions and impose significant legal and fiscal consequences. The debate highlighted constitutional and practical questions about ex post facto application and the state’s authority to force sales.

Key points from debate
- Sponsor’s description: Senator Keiser said the bill targets “foreign adversaries” as defined by federal regulation and would not apply to de minimis indirect interests (the sponsor said less than 5% controlling interest would be excluded). He said the bill also would allow the Idaho Department of Agriculture to adopt implementing rules subject to legislative approval.
- National-security rationale: Senator Adams and others said they had discussed the issue with the Idaho National Guard and Mountain Home Air Force Base and described concerns about foreign surveillance of training operations.
- Retroactivity and fairness concerns: Senator Guthrie and others stressed the bill’s retroactive language and the provision allowing judicial foreclosure would risk forcing sales “for pennies on the dollar,” harming lenders and prompting lawsuits. Guthrie asked how a forced sale within 180 days would avoid leaving lenders with large losses.
- Constitutional questions: Senator Leahy raised Article I, Section 16 of the U.S. Constitution (ex post facto bans and bills of attainder) and asked whether the measure could be read to allow retroactive enforcement; Keiser and other supporters said they did not have a fully vetted legal opinion on that point and acknowledged the question’s seriousness.
- Local-business and image concerns: Senator Foreman said a broad bar on ownership by nationals of listed countries could prevent lawful, non-criminal buyers from owning property and asked whether the state should be excluding people who had not broken Idaho law.

Action and next steps
- Debate remained open on the floor; Senate members later agreed to move House Bill 3-56 to the fourteenth order of business for possible amendment. No final passage vote occurred in the April 2 session transcript.

Speakers listed in transcript
Senator Keiser (bill sponsor)
Senator Adams
Senator Guthrie
Senator Foreman
Senator Leahy
Senator Conowich
Senator O'Connoritz
Senator Woodward
Senator Den Hartog

Authorities referenced
- regulation: \"Code of Federal Regulations\" (adversary determinations referenced by sponsor) — referenced_by: [\"Senator Keiser\"]
- other: \"U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 16 (ex post facto/bill of attainder concerns)\" — referenced_by: [\"Senator Leahy\"]

Actions
[{
\"kind\":\"referral\",
\"identifiers\":{\"agenda_item_id\":\"HB356\"},
\"motion\":\"Unanimous consent request to dispense with further reading and place House Bill 3-56 before the Senate for consideration; debate left open and bill moved to 14th order for possible amendment.\",
\"mover\":\"Senator Keiser\",
\"second\":\"not specified\",
\"vote_record\":[],
\"tally\":{},
\"outcome\":\"postponed\",
\"notes\":\"Floor debate left open; bill sent to fourteenth order for possible amendment. No final passage recorded in transcript.\"
}]

Discussion vs. decision
- Discussion points: national-security risk to military training areas; definition of \"foreign adversary\"; exceptions for federal national-security waivers; retroactivity and potential lender losses; fairness for lawful owners.
- Directions: debate left open; bill referred to fourteenth-order consideration for possible amendment.
- Decisions: none recorded on final passage during the session excerpt provided.

Clarifying details
[{\"category\":\"divestment timeline\",\"detail\":\"Sponsor described a six-month period to sell controlling assets; judicial foreclosure if not sold\",\"value\":\"6\",\"units\":\"months\",\"approximate\":false,\"source_speaker\":\"Senator Keiser\"},{\"category\":\"de minimis threshold\",\"detail\":\"Sponsor said exemptions for de minimis indirect interest would apply under 5% controlling interest\",\"source_speaker\":\"Senator Keiser\"},{\"category\":\"forced-sale concern\",\"detail\":\"Senator Guthrie described a 180-day forced-sale example and warned sales could be 'pennies on the dollar'\",\"source_speaker\":\"Senator Guthrie\"}]

Proper names
[{\"name\":\"Syngenta\",\"type\":\"business\"},{\"name\":\"Mountain Home Air Force Base\",\"type\":\"facility\"}]

Community relevance
{\"geographies\":[\"statewide\",\"areas near Mountain Home Air Force Base\"],\"funding_sources\":[],\"impact_groups\":[\"landowners\",\"agricultural businesses\",\"local governments\",\"military installations\"]}

Meeting context
{\"engagement_level\":{\"speakers_count\":9,\"duration_minutes\":75,\"items_count\":1},\"implementation_risk\":\"high\",\"history\":[{\"date\":\"2025-04-02\",\"note\":\"Floor debate opened; later moved to 14th order for amendments\"}],\"implementation_risk\":\"high\"}

Searchable_tags\":[\"foreign-ownership\",\"land-use\",\"national-security\",\"HB356\",\"Idaho\"]

Provenance
{\"transcript_segments\":[{\"block_id\":\"block_716.175\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":1346,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"Thank you, mister president. Senators, this legislation expands on current code that was passed through this body related to foreign governments and prohibitions of purchasing of forest land. So including, prohibitions related to agricultural land, water rights, and claims of, mining claims and mineral rights. So, any foreign adversary under this legislation would be required to sell their controlling assets within 6 months. If they do not sell the land or mining claims or mineral rights, then it may be sold by judicial foreclosure.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicintro\"},{\"block_id\":\"block_1671.855\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":151,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"I can't specify the specifics on a map. I was hoping to have a graph for everybody handed out this morning, which you don't have, but these are specific to the areas of operations conducted by our military here in state.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicfinish\"}]},

salience\":{\"overall\":0.68,\"overall_justification\":\"Debate raised constitutional and fiscal risks and affects landowners statewide and military security zones.\",\"impact_scope\":\"statewide\",\"impact_scope_justification\":\"Provisions would affect land, water and mineral rights statewide, with special reference to military areas.\",\"attention_level\":\"medium\",\"attention_level_justification\":\"Sustained floor debate and legal questions but no final vote in this transcript.\"},

engagement_forecast\":{\"newsworthiness\":{\"local\":0.85,\"regional\":0.25,\"national\":0.10,\"justification\":\"State-level legislation with potential national-security framing; higher local interest in affected counties.\"},\"notify_recommendation\":{\"audience\":\"state\",\"reason\":\"High civic salience for landowners, county governments and military installations.\",\"justification\":\"Potential lawsuits and property impacts warrant notice to legal and local-government audiences.\"},\"notify_thresholds\":{\"local_min\":0.3,\"regional_min\":0.6,\"national_min\":0.8}},

graph_signals\":{\"jurisdictions\":[\"US-ID\"],\"ontology_topics\":[\"land-ownership\",\"national-security\",\"property-law\"],\"entities\":[{\"id\":\"syngenta\",\"name\":\"Syngenta\",\"type\":\"business\"}],\"events\":[]}

},{","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Legislative Session Day 87 April 02, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","House Bill 3-56, introduced April 2 in the Idaho Senate, would expand state prohibitions on foreign ownership to cover agricultural land, water rights and mining claims when the owner is a listed \"foreign adversary\" and could require sale or judicial foreclosure if assets are not divested within six months.","taxTitle","2025 Senate Legislative Sessions, 2025 Legislative Sessions, Idaho","taxId",77672,"location","Idaho","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6090238,"Senate passes lobbying recodification after lengthy debate over 'indirect lobbying' definition",2587,2316970,4904900,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2869122-3b3004fcdeb037233f6242781e7e91a7&start=2316&end=4904","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2869122-3b3004fcdeb037233f6242781e7e91a7/thumbnail_2316970.jpg","/articles/6090238/Idaho/Senate-passes-lobbying-recodification-after-lengthy-debate-over-indirect-lobbying-definition","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6090238-ed1fa291b13b20bd527e24e9eb8210b5/orig.mp4?Expires=1771192716&Signature=Tf93zbv-eu2tqlB4n-nZXkALc3ILLpmQcrtkuxPVYMIB7ESnlmjjGQsqcpmBCawUqOFSBzIUWowdKVtIA~hxmuwCGJCBeCVUS07OZNdw9BB-cBliP5fJICz~NkZJWsusOsq0hG~HxpQdjUNepYkeWqL18NWjcDASAQMmk4UxRVeUYUUk0tO2fRT17xJxJz56JJYUgmgLr~dsrG~nmRHCjBck1KkcYE0714S86t0BdrNF-9aK173t2Da5MoAfu1klVrGxXU4j3CiEQ4MjmnQ7ArHLA9DrfE2dizz-X12XTRoyV2JFXbl4Go372aeL-EBEQNevsvbHz9hmWtfN6S9A5A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 3-98, the lobbying recodification bill, passed the Idaho Senate on April 2 after extended floor debate that centered on a new definition of \"indirect lobbying\" and expanded reporting requirements for certain paid outreach.

Sponsor Senator Anthony said the bill reorganizes existing law—moving lobbying code from Title 67 to Title 74—and adds new reporting and disclosure requirements for modern communications, including social media, email solicitations and small paid ads. \"Sunshine's a good thing,\" Anthony told the chamber as he urged support.

Why it matters: supporters framed the bill as modernization of decades-old law so voters can see who pays for online and indirect influence; critics said the bill's broad language could make compensated grassroots activity subject to lobbyist registration, raising First Amendment concerns and creating barriers for small campaigns and civic groups.

Major elements and debate
- Recodification and transparency: the bill moves existing lobbying statutes into Title 74 (the \"transparent ethical government\" section) and requires monthly reporting for registered lobbyists year-round, with 48-hour reports for indirect lobbying expenditures above specified thresholds.
- Indirect lobbying definition: the most contested change adds a definition of indirect lobbying to include attempts to influence public opinion about legislation or public officials by email, direct message, door-to-door and social media; the sponsor said the definition clarifies when online spending must be reported.
- Exemptions and thresholds: the bill retains exemptions for individuals who receive no compensation and defines a small-compensation carve-out (exempting those whose lobbying compensation does not exceed $250 per quarter in one presentation on the floor). Supporters repeatedly pointed to statutory exemptions that keep individual constituents from being swept into registration.
- Free-speech concerns: opponents, including Senator Tara Cole and others, argued the definition could require door-knockers, compensated campaign workers and small civic organizers to register as lobbyists and file complex reports; Cole invoked the First Amendment and said the change could chill grassroots participation.

Floor action
- Sponsor: Senator Anthony opened and closed debate and requested unanimous consent that further reading be dispensed with.
- Final vote: the Senate passed House Bill 3-98; the roll-call result reported on the floor was 27 in favor and 8 against. The journal entry shows the bill \"is passed the senate.\" (Paired votes and individual recorded votes appear in the session journal.)

Speakers listed in transcript
Senator Anthony (bill sponsor)
Senator Semleroff
Senator Henson
Senator Tara Cole
Senator Shippey
Senator Felderfeld
Senator Galloway
Senator Bierke
Senator Nichols

Authorities referenced
- code: Idaho statutes recodified from Title 67 to Title 74 — referenced_by: [\"Senator Anthony\"]
- other: First Amendment, U.S. Constitution — referenced_by: [\"Senator Tara Cole\"]

Actions
[{
\"kind\":\"other\",
\"identifiers\":{\"agenda_item_id\":\"HB398\"},
\"motion\":\"Unanimous-consent motion to dispense with further reading and place House Bill 3-98 before the Senate for final consideration; sponsor requested passage.\",
\"mover\":\"Senator Anthony\",
\"second\":\"not specified\",
\"tally\":{\"yes\":27,\"no\":8,\"abstain\":0,\"absent\":0,\"recused\":0},
\"vote_record\":[],
\"outcome\":\"approved\",
\"notes\":\"Senate journal records passage; bill reorganizes lobbying statutes and expands reporting requirements for certain indirect lobbying activities.\"
}]

Discussion vs decision
- Discussion: scope and definition of \"indirect lobbying,\" exemptions for uncompensated constituents, monthly vs. 48-hour reporting thresholds, burden on grassroots groups.
- Direction: retained statutory definition moving to Title 74; reporting increases for registered lobbyists.
- Decision: House Bill 3-98 passed the Senate by recorded tally reported on the floor.

Clarifying details
[{\"category\":\"reporting\",\"detail\":\"Monthly reporting for registered lobbyists year-round; 48-hour reporting for indirect lobbying expenditures above specified thresholds\",\"source_speaker\":\"Senator Anthony\"},{\"category\":\"exemption\",\"detail\":\"Exemption for persons whose compensation for lobbying does not exceed $250 per quarter as described on the floor\",\"source_speaker\":\"Senator Shippey\"},{\"category\":\"definition\",\"detail\":\"Indirect lobbying includes attempts to influence public opinion by email, direct messaging, door-to-door solicitation, billboards, television and social media\",\"source_speaker\":\"Senator Anthony\"}]

Proper names
[{\"name\":\"Title 74, Idaho Code\",\"type\":\"other\"},{\"name\":\"Title 67, Idaho Code\",\"type\":\"other\"}]

Community relevance
{\"geographies\":[\"statewide\"],\"funding_sources\":[],\"impact_groups\":[\"grassroots organizers\",\"campaigns\",\"lobbyists\",\"universities\",\"nonprofit communicators\"]}

Meeting context
{\"engagement_level\":{\"speakers_count\":18,\"duration_minutes\":120,\"items_count\":1},\"implementation_risk\":\"medium\",\"history\":[{\"date\":\"2025-04-02\",\"note\":\"Lengthy floor debate on indirect lobbying; bill passed the Senate; returns to House.\"}]}

Searchable_tags\":[\"HB398\",\"lobbying\",\"campaign-finance\",\"indirect-lobbying\"],

Provenance
{\"transcript_segments\":[{\"block_id\":\"block_2292.82\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":155,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"In the House of Representatives, House Bill 3 98 by State Affairs Committee and actually adding to lobbyists relating to the registration of lobbyists relating to exemption from registration.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicintro\"},{\"block_id\":\"block_4727.81\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":59,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"Debate is closed. The question before the senate is, shall house bill number 3 98 pass the senate? The senate secretary will call the roll.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicfinish\"}]}

salience\":{\"overall\":0.82,\"overall_justification\":\"High civic salience because it changes lobbyist reporting and may affect campaign and grassroots activity statewide.\",\"impact_scope\":\"local\",\"impact_scope_justification\":\"Statewide statute affecting campaigns, nonprofits and universities.\",\"attention_level\":\"high\",\"attention_level_justification\":\"Prolonged floor debate and First Amendment concerns.\",\"novelty\":0.46,\"novelty_justification\":\"Mostly recodification with clarified definitions and modern reporting on digital activity.\",\"timeliness_urgency\":0.65,\"timeliness_urgency_justification\":\"Passed amid session; immediate implementation of reporting changes for registered lobbyists.\",\"legal_significance\":0.58,\"legal_significance_justification\":\"Raises potential constitutional questions but includes exemptions and thresholds.\",\"budgetary_significance\":0.05,\"budgetary_significance_justification\":\"No direct appropriation recorded in debate.\",\"public_safety_risk\":0.01,\"public_safety_risk_justification\":\"Not a public-safety measure.\"},

engagement_forecast\":{\"newsworthiness\":{\"national\":0.05,\"regional\":0.15,\"local\":0.85,\"justification\":\"Strong local interest among civic groups and campaigns; limited national relevance.\"},\"notify_recommendation\":{\"audience\":\"state\",\"reason\":\"Campaigns, civic groups, university public-affairs offices and municipal clerks should be notified.\",\"justification\":\"Reporting and registration changes affect practitioners statewide.\"},\"predicted_interest\":{\"national\":0.05,\"regional\":0.20,\"local\":0.8,\"justification\":\"Local campaigns and civic organizers will closely monitor implementation.\"},\"predicted_click_through\":0.18,\"predicted_click_through_justification\":\"Broad interest among politically engaged readers.\"},

graph_signals\":{\"jurisdictions\":[\"US-ID\"],\"ontology_topics\":[\"ethics\",\"campaign-finance\",\"lobbying\"],\"naics_codes\":[],\"entities\":[],\"events\":[]}
","House Bill 3-98, the lobbying recodification and reporting bill, passed the Idaho Senate after extended debate over a new definition of “indirect lobbying.”",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6090230,"Votes at a glance: bills the Idaho Senate passed April 2",1998,4403100,6401740,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2869122-3b3004fcdeb037233f6242781e7e91a7&start=4403&end=6401","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2869122-3b3004fcdeb037233f6242781e7e91a7/thumbnail_4403100.jpg","/articles/6090230/Idaho/Votes-at-a-glance-bills-the-Idaho-Senate-passed-April-2","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6090230-1a4a2a888bb0c07fb89ebff38864a575/orig.mp4?Expires=1771192716&Signature=dy2b9t~YDtlpJ0lofVQPU84xmCd0FDPckCK6eXKh--GnxifGApjVjOncDXN4XevIRaRlXDde9g6x-rPBRgLamZ-JKz5cwY8LJL615F-GUCl9kpAFFDjCOUhk6eM9AqQ4ohgeu4V-mbiOWWwFEtY1EKJ8oNzDX8kFYjmumYwF98AgIa6wMG8~~dmckGvKOMt247EI99ilbcVi5nXxm3U621M1C3Rba6P72j83W2QVNhXKOK9YHfgPbqX-RL62j7quO84V6BAcMDee20-XzzT2C6EVHkFWJrwa3xE1r-aUZ65ABpRYa4OASQC2XAbLoBHFx0bof9thCcAwlXl2vpFZXw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Idaho Senate recorded votes or final action on several bills during the April 2 session. Below are the items that the floor transcript records as having been decided and the floor-reported tallies or outcomes.

Votes and outcomes (as recorded in the Senate session transcript)
- House Bill 3-98 (lobbying recodification): Passed the Senate; floor-reported tally 27 in favor, 8 against. (Sponsor: Senator Anthony)
- Senate Bill 11-25 (constitutional defense counsel assistance): Passed the Senate; floor-reported tally 29 in favor, 6 against. (Sponsor: Senator Sarah Foreman)
- Senate Bill 12-13 (appropriation to support statewide literacy/science-of-reading training): Passed the Senate; floor-reported tally 22 in favor, 11 against (with two absences noted in roll-call sequence). (Sponsor: Senator Cook)
- Senate Bill 12-14 (appropriation to Public Utilities Commission for wildfire-standard implementation staffing): Passed the Senate; floor-reported tally 28 in favor, 7 against. (Sponsor: Senator Woodward)
- Senate Bill 12-15 (Millennium Income Fund appropriations — tobacco settlement-related programs): Passed the Senate; floor-reported tally 26 in favor, 9 against. (Sponsor: Senator Woodward)
- House Bill 4-68 (appropriation to Industrial Commission maintenance and positions): Passed the Senate; floor-reported tally 24 in favor, 11 against. (Sponsor: Senator Woodward)
- House Bill 4-69 (appropriation to Idaho Transportation Department; Techum/transportation fund increase): Passed the Senate by unanimous recorded tally (35-0 as reported on floor). (Sponsor: Senator Wintrow)
- House Bill 4-39 (maintenance appropriation for Department of Administration): Passed the Senate; floor-reported tally 32 in favor, 3 against. (Sponsor: Senator Galloway)
- House Bill 4-57 (sales-tax exemption for animal-rescue adoptions / related tax provisions): Passed the Senate; floor-reported tally 35 in favor, 0 against. (Sponsor: Senator Galloway)
- House Bill 3-55 (property-tax deferral and related tax provisions as amended in Senate): Passed the Senate; floor-reported tally 35 in favor, 0 against. (Sponsor: Senator Bierke)

Notes and context
- Several of the items above were considered as \"trailer\" or appropriation bills tied to policy measures already passed; the Senate transcript shows unanimous-consent requests to dispense with further reading in many cases before final roll calls.
- Where the Senate floor transcript reported paired votes or individual recorded votes, the floor journal should be consulted for full roll-call lists and any corrections.

What to watch next
- Bills that passed the Senate are recorded as transmitted to the House of Representatives or to the governor as appropriate in the session transcript. For the official record and full roll-call lists, consult the Senate Journal and the Idaho Legislature’s website.","The Senate recorded final-floor action on multiple appropriations and policy trailer bills on April 2. This roundup lists each bill that received a floor vote in the transcript, the reported outcome, and the session note about next steps.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6090234,"Senate approves expansion of constitutional-defense fund to help local governments pay legal costs",760,4958180,5718355,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2869122-3b3004fcdeb037233f6242781e7e91a7&start=4958&end=5718","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2869122-3b3004fcdeb037233f6242781e7e91a7/thumbnail_4958180.jpg","/articles/6090234/Idaho/Senate-approves-expansion-of-constitutional-defense-fund-to-help-local-governments-pay-legal-costs","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6090234-afbaef8cf534096633704499e0b78778/orig.mp4?Expires=1771192716&Signature=dDJ-bCmB~ObNOTWOX~Q0PtBwY8kn9fJOBmQC4Mrt-3aL0RBOo9u3f~Wzk3RepLRi3vQa23g~nMIFoJVB9Fy3VHk3w0M43qPE-iKkxUQI2qJU7ecpEzYLuTncWQtNeOJzz-D5Vg0HUtmMAq8JZdMNgzNZJssMhdikAQboyptlDn8UAWt8lRuFy5llw6kSj-yZPRwclzymzkRCNZ9T6SoSCImQDVQzSkwe8yDBhrKEnu-xk5VksB0hVPUH-NTBTefpO0EKwsG3GTGppxjV3bJp2aYl-MoyLRTB0QYfwELZe4G2ImE1Qr~L2dwxW5XR-xNNf1deVPKHfMS6t-2p4mYjqg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 11-25, approved by the Idaho Senate on April 2, adds a new section to Idaho Code to allow a political subdivision (cities or counties) to request state assistance when defending legal challenges to the constitutionality of state statutes.

Sponsor Senator Sarah Foreman said the bill would amend chapter 63 of Title 67 with a new section (67-6303) that permits local governments to request assistance that could include funding from the constitutional defense fund for private counsel, reimbursement of attorneys' fees and costs, assistance from the Idaho attorney general, or state intervention. \"Numerous counties in Idaho are currently being sued regarding the constitutionality of Idaho's House Bill 710 of the 2024 legislative session,\" Foreman said on the floor.

Why it matters: backers argued the measure helps local governments respond to litigation challenging state laws and preserves state sovereignty by centralizing consideration of whether to provide assistance. Opponents warned it could incentivize passage of statutes that prompt litigation and saddle the state with defense costs.

Floor debate and votes
- Sponsor presentation: Foreman outlined the new code section and said the constitutional defense counsel would evaluate applications based on public interest, availability of state resources, and whether intervention would advance the state's sovereignty and authority.
- Opposition and fiscal concerns: At least one senator urged caution, saying the legislature has spent millions defending statutes thought likely to be struck down and argued the bill could encourage passing contested laws because local governments could then access state funds for defense. The floor record cited roughly $11 million in prior defense spending as context for opposition remarks on the floor.
- Final vote: the Senate reported 29 in favor and 6 against; the bill passed and was transmitted to the House.

Speakers listed in transcript
Senator Sarah Foreman (bill sponsor)
Senator Den Hartog
Senator Wintrow
Senator Guthrie
Senator Sharotke (floor comments identified by actor 20 in transcript)

Authorities referenced
- code: Proposed new Idaho Code section 67-6303 — referenced_by: [\"Senator Sarah Foreman\"]
- other: References on the floor to House Bill 710 (2024) and Idaho ICE Act (2025) as context — referenced_by: [\"Senator Sarah Foreman\"]

Actions
[{
\"kind\":\"other\",
\"identifiers\":{\"agenda_item_id\":\"SB1125\"},
\"motion\":\"Unanimous-consent request to dispense with further reading and place Senate Bill 11-25 before the Senate for final consideration; sponsor requested affirmative vote.\",
\"mover\":\"Senator Sarah Foreman\",
\"second\":\"not specified\",
\"tally\":{\"yes\":29,\"no\":6,\"abstain\":0,\"absent\":0,\"recused\":0},
\"vote_record\":[],
\"outcome\":\"approved\",
\"notes\":\"Senate voted to pass SB 11-25; journal shows the title approved and bill transmitted to the House of Representatives.\"
}]

Discussion vs. decision
- Discussion: whether the state should provide legal defense resources to political subdivisions and whether the availability of funds encourages passing litigation-prone statutes.
- Direction: the bill creates a process and criteria (public interest, resource availability, effect on state sovereignty) for the constitutional defense counsel to evaluate requests.
- Decision: the Senate passed the bill and plans to transmit it to the House.

Clarifying details
[{\"category\":\"statute\",\"detail\":\"New Idaho Code section: 67-6303, allowing political subdivisions to request state assistance in legal actions challenging constitutionality of statutes\",\"source_speaker\":\"Senator Sarah Foreman\"},{\"category\":\"funding_history\",\"detail\":\"Speaker on floor referenced approximately $11,000,000 spent by constitutional defense and legislative funds over the last decade for related legal defenses\",\"source_speaker\":\"floor speaker identified in transcript\"}]

Proper names
[{\"name\":\"House Bill 710 (2024)\",\"type\":\"other\"},{\"name\":\"Idaho ICE Act (2025)\",\"type\":\"other\"}]

Community relevance
{\"geographies\":[\"statewide\"],\"funding_sources\":[\"constitutional defense fund\"],\"impact_groups\":[\"counties\",\"cities\",\"local governments\",\"taxpayers\"]}

Meeting context
{\"engagement_level\":{\"speakers_count\":6,\"duration_minutes\":20,\"items_count\":1},\"implementation_risk\":\"medium\",\"history\":[{\"date\":\"2025-04-02\",\"note\":\"Bill debated and passed on Senate floor; transmitted to House.\"}]}

Searchable_tags\":[\"SB1125\",\"constitutional-defense\",\"local-governments\"],

Provenance
{\"transcript_segments\":[{\"block_id\":\"block_4958.18\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":667,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"Thank you, mister president. This legislation amends chapter 63, title 67, Idaho code by the addition of a new section, 67 dash 63 0 3 entitled defense of state law political subdivisions. Idaho code 6 dash 9 0 2 states any county or city in Idaho is considered a political subdivision of the state of Idaho. The new section 67 dash 63 0 3 of Idaho code referenced in this legislation states a political subdivision of the state of Idaho may request the state provide assistance with or participation in a legal action involving a challenge to the constitutionality of a state statute. Numerous counties in Idaho are currently being sued regarding the constitutionality of Idaho's house bill 7 10 of the 2024 legislative session, also known as the Children's School and Library Protection Act.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicintro\"},{\"block_id\":\"block_5717.745\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":69,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"Vote count shows 29 in favor with 6 against the majority having voted in the affirmative. Senate bill 11 25 has passed the senate.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicfinish\"}]}

salience\":{\"overall\":0.66,\"overall_justification\":\"Affects state legal spending and local-government capacity to defend statutes; fiscal implications noted on the floor.\",\"impact_scope\":\"statewide\",\"impact_scope_justification\":\"Provides mechanism for counties and cities across Idaho to request state assistance.\",\"attention_level\":\"medium\",\"attention_level_justification\":\"Discussed briefly with fiscal concerns raised and a recorded vote.\"},

engagement_forecast\":{\"newsworthiness\":{\"national\":0.02,\"regional\":0.10,\"local\":0.80,\"justification\":\"Primarily of interest to Idaho counties, municipal attorneys and local officials.\"},\"notify_recommendation\":{\"audience\":\"state\",\"reason\":\"County and city officials and local government associations should be notified due to direct financial and legal implications.\"},\"notify_thresholds\":{\"local_min\":0.3,\"regional_min\":0.6,\"national_min\":0.9}},

graph_signals\":{\"jurisdictions\":[\"US-ID\"],\"ontology_topics\":[\"state-finance\",\"litigation-support\"],\"entities\":[],\"events\":[]}

","Senate Bill 11-25 passed after floor debate. The bill allows political subdivisions to request state assistance — including counsel and reimbursement — when defending legal challenges to state statutes, and creates criteria for the constitutional defense counsel to evaluate requests.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Senate debate questions retroactive power in bill targeting foreign adversary land ownership

Senate passes lobbying recodification after lengthy debate over 'indirect lobbying' definition

Votes at a glance: bills the Idaho Senate passed April 2

Senate approves expansion of constitutional-defense fund to help local governments pay legal costs