Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House approves bill limiting mandatory DEI requirements at public universities after extended debate
Summary
Senate Bill 11‑98, a statewide measure that restricts mandatory diversity/equity/inclusion (DEI) requirements tied to degrees and establishes reporting and enforcement mechanisms, passed the House after prolonged debate; vote recorded at 52‑19 (1 absent/excused reported).
The Idaho House on April 3 approved Senate Bill 11‑98, legislation that limits required DEI coursework or requirements for degree completion at public institutions, sets reporting and review obligations for universities, and authorizes enforcement actions by the attorney general. The measure passed after extensive floor debate by a recorded margin of 52‑19 (with 1 member reported absent/excused during roll calls).
Supporters argued the bill protects students and faculty from mandatory ideological instruction and said it preserves academic freedom for classroom discussion while preventing mandatory DEI courses as a graduation requirement. The bill’s sponsor, Representative (sponsor_DEI), said the measure was a “compromise” crafted after a task force review and codifies prior State Board of Education resolutions; she said the bill still allows research, training and voluntary instruction but prohibits programs that require DEI curricula for graduation.
Opponents—including lawmakers who served on the task force and those who noted the historical context for inclusion training—said the bill risks censorship and creates an uneven enforcement regime. Several members argued that trainings and classroom materials that include civil‑rights history, implicit bias or workplace compliance are important and that the bill’s private‑cause‑of‑action and attorney‑general enforcement mechanisms could chill legitimate curricular decisions.
Key elements reported on the floor included a requirement that universities file annual reports to the Legislature and Education Committee, a private cause of action limited to injunctive relief (not monetary penalties), and an attorney‑general role in investigating alleged violations; the bill also sets a cap for potential budgetary impacts and clarifies that protections for faculty research and student clubs remain.
Members on both sides described long committee work and public comment. Several representatives said they supported the bill as a corrective to alleged instances where dissenting views were suppressed; others said the measure creates a precedent for government oversight of higher education curricula.
With House passage the bill will move on to the Senate to reconcile amendments already adopted by that chamber and for enrollment.
