Senate panel backs bill allowing Idaho cities and counties to request state legal assistance in constitutional challenges

The Senate State Affairs Committee approved Senate Bill 1125 and recommended it be sent to the floor with a due-pass recommendation after testimony from county prosecutors and municipal association representatives who described the fiscal and operational strain when local governments are sued over state statutes.

Senator Dan Foreman, sponsor of SB 1125, said the bill would add a new section to Idaho Code to allow a political subdivision to request state assistance or participation in legal actions challenging the constitutionality of a state statute. Foreman said requested assistance could include access to the constitutional defense fund, funding for private counsel, reimbursement of attorneys’ fees, assistance from the Idaho Attorney General and possible state intervention. He said the constitutional defense counsel would consider whether the public interest and state resources favored participation.

Benjamin Allen, elected prosecuting attorney for Shoshone County, urged passage and said small rural counties can be financially overwhelmed when defending constitutional litigation. “An award of costs and fees in the federal judgment for constitutional litigation can be enough to break the budget of a small rural county such as mine,” Allen said, urging the legislature to provide tools and assurances to local partners.

Seth Grigg, executive director of the Idaho Association of Counties, told the committee that several counties were sued in recent sessions — including litigation tied to House Bill 710 and, later, House Bill 83 — and that many rural counties have only a single prosecutor or a prosecutor and deputy. He said SB 1125 would not guarantee assistance but would provide an option for local governments to request help from the constitutional defense fund.

Jonathan Wheatley, deputy director of the Association of Idaho Cities, said cities also get caught “in the crossfire” of enforcing state law and supported SB 1125, noting the bill does not create indemnification or additional state obligations but provides an option to ask for state help.

Committee action: Senator Anthony moved SB 1125 be sent to the floor with a due‑pass recommendation; Senator Den Hartog seconded. The motion carried; Senator Rucki was recorded as voting no.

What the bill would do: as described in committee, the bill would add a statutory mechanism allowing counties or cities to request state assistance when faced with litigation challenging a state statute, including access to the constitutional defense fund, consideration by constitutional defense counsel, and potential intervention by the state.

Context and concerns: speakers said the statute responds to recent litigation involving county enforcement of state laws and the financial risk to small jurisdictions. Committee discussion included the appropriate role of the state in defending laws and the frequency with which the legislature passes measures that may prompt legal challenges; one senator objected on grounds that the legislature should avoid passing constitutionally suspect bills in the first place.

Next steps: the committee recommended SB 1125 be sent to the Senate floor for further consideration.