A federal judge has stopped enforcement of Idaho's restrictive bathroom law before it takes effect, ruling that transgender people will not face criminal prosecution for using public restrooms consistent with their gender identity. The decision Tuesday from U.S. District Judge Amanda Brailsford freezes key provisions of legislation signed by Republican Gov. Brad Little in March, which was set to begin July 1.
The law stands out among similar state measures for its breadth and severity. While at least 19 states restrict bathroom access in schools or government buildings, Idaho extended restrictions to private establishments with public restrooms. It also introduced criminal penalties absent in most other states: up to one year in prison for a first violation and up to five years for a second.
The statute included narrow exceptions allowing use of single-occupancy restrooms designated for the opposite sex only in cases of "dire need" when no other option exists. Idaho's police chiefs flagged concerns about enforcing the vague standard, questioning how officers would determine when someone truly faced such circumstances.
Six Idaho transgender residents, represented by Lambda Legal and the American Civil Liberties Union, challenged the law as unconstitutionally vague. Brailsford agreed in substantial part, finding the statute failed to give clear notice of what conduct it prohibited.
The judge's order did not strike down the law entirely but carved out protections. Enforcement cannot proceed against someone using a single-stall restroom or in situations where no single-user facility is available and unoccupied on the same floor as a multi-stall facility. The ruling effectively shields transgender Idahoans from arrest for basic restroom use while litigation continues.
"This ruling will allow transgender people throughout Idaho to find and use a public restroom without the fear of arrest looming over them," Lambda Legal lawyer Kell Olson said in a statement.
State Attorney General Raul Labrador signaled an immediate challenge to the decision. He disputed the judge's analysis, contending that biological sex provides a clear standard and that the law itself is not ambiguous. Labrador also noted the ruling does not affect application of the law to changing rooms and certain restrooms, and said it applies to people regardless of transgender status.
The ACLU's Barbara Schwabauer characterized the preliminary injunction as essential protection. "No one should be forced to choose between the threat of arrest for being themselves in public or the threat of harassment and violence," she said.
Author Sarah Mitchell: "This ruling exposes how difficult it is to enforce bathroom restrictions based on gender identity, and the state's appeal will likely hinge on whether courts accept that biological sex alone solves the law's vagueness problem."
Comments