Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Privacy Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill that would require sex-based designation of multi-occupancy restrooms and sleeping areas with exemptions
Summary
H 264 would require covered entities to designate multi-occupancy restrooms, changing rooms and sleeping areas by biological sex, allow limited exceptions and create a private cause of action; the committee sent the bill to the 14th Order after divided testimony from advocates, health-care and higher-education stakeholders.
The Senate State Affairs Committee voted March 19 to send H 264, "Protecting the Privacy of Women," to the 14th Order for possible amendment after extended testimony and debate over enforcement, scope and effects on transgender people and campuses.
Representative Ehardt, sponsor of the bill, asked the committee to consider amendments recommended by the Idaho Sheriff’s Association and yielded time to Sarah Beth Nolan, legal counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom. Nolan said the bill would require covered entities — correctional facilities, juvenile detention centers, domestic-violence shelters and public higher-education institutions — to designate multi-occupancy restrooms, changing rooms and sleeping areas based on biological sex as defined by state law. Single-user restrooms and changing areas would be exempt, she said, and exceptions would allow entry for law enforcement, medical emergencies, maintenance and coaching. Nolan said the bill provides for reasonable steps by facilities to ensure privacy and that it would comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Nolan also described a private cause of action if a facility explicitly allowed a person of the opposite sex to use a designated space or failed to prevent violations. "At public higher educational institutions it prevents female students from being forced to have male roommates," Nolan said. She told the committee the bill does not regulate gender identity; it applies to biological sex, including intersex conditions as defined in Idaho Code.
Public testimony included multiple opponents who raised concerns about enforcement, ambiguity in definitions and safety for transgender people. Mistie DelliCarpini-Tolman of Planned Parenthood said the bill "posed safety issues to the transgender community" and would contribute to a climate of fear for women. Several public commenters including Lily Pannkkuk and others said universities are public-facing institutions where enforcement could be problematic. Roddy White warned that the private-cause-of-action language could invite frivolous lawsuits against public institutions.
Senator Ruchti pressed on enforcement hypotheticals, asking whether security personnel's interactions would be adequate in ambiguous encounters; Nolan said that facility policy and personnel judgment would guide responses. Senator Adams spoke in favor of the bill, describing its core purpose as safety rather than morality and noting his sponsorship of similar prior legislation. Senator Ruchti asked to be recorded as voting nay when the motion to send the bill to the 14th Order passed by voice vote.
The committee did not take a roll-call vote. The bill will return for possible amendment and further committee consideration.
