Bill would ban K-12 gender identity, sexual orientation

BOISE — The Senate Education Committee voted Monday to hold a bill in committee seeking to enact a total ban on gender identity and sexual orientation in K-12 schools. House Bill 516 sought to further tighten rules on this instruction that passed in the previous legislative session.

The bill revises House Bill 352, which was itself an addition to the 2024 Parental Rights Act that brought a slew of parental consent requirements for issues ranging from medical care received at schools to interactions with school resource officers. 

House Bill 352 added to the Parental Rights Act a prohibition on classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity, “or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students.” The new bill brought forward by Rep. Dale Hawkins, R-Fernwood, sought to remove the “age-appropriate” standard entirely, effectively banning gender identity or sexual orientation instruction in K-12 schools.

Doug Taylor, a conservative lobbyist who assisted Hawkins in writing House Bill 352, said the inclusion of this “age-appropriate clause” stemmed from the original intent to prohibit K-3 instruction on gender identity or sexual orientation. When it expanded to a K-12 prohibition, Taylor said the remaining clause was moot as the intention was for the instruction prohibition to be “absolute,” removing the need for any qualifier. 

By striking this language, Taylor said, Idahoans would have greater clarity about what was and wasn’t allowed in public schools.

Members of the committee, as well as individuals who testified, took issue with this removal, stating it would hinder the agency of school districts and prohibit students' ability to be taught on any kind of relationship, including heterosexual relationships.

During questioning of Hawkins on the change, Sen. Jim Woodward, R-Sagle, referred to a section of Idaho code established in 1970 stating “the decision as to whether or not any program in family life and sex education is to be introduced in the schools is a matter for determination at the local district level by the local school board.” 

“How do we balance these two out?” Woodward said. “We have something that's been in place for 56 years, as compared to something that's been in place one year.” 

Hawkins responded that he did not believe this existing code contradicts the law enacted last year.

Sen. Kevin Cook, R-Idaho Falls, said he felt “really uncomfortable” that an absolute ban would entail the prohibition of heterosexual orientation and the removal of teacher discretion. Cook said he did not believe his grandchildren — one in kindergarten and another in sixth grade — should be taught the same subjects. “My sixth-grade grandchild needs to learn some of this stuff,” Cook said.

The majority of those who testified spoke against the change, arguing that it removed the ability for school districts and teachers to provide instruction as they deem appropriate.  

Mary Brown, who identified as an Idaho resident and mother, said she was concerned that the language proposed for removal by Hawkins would limit educators’ ability to ensure that classroom instruction aligns with a child’s developmental level. 

“I personally don't find the language confusing or redundant,” Brown said. “I find it to be an important safeguard that helps ensure discussions happen in ways that are appropriate for students at all different ages.” 

Jeffery Watkins, a District 16 resident, said he was opposed to the bill on the basis that it exists to “persecute our LGBTQ+ community members” and “make education worse for everyone.” If the bill were to pass, Watkins questioned whether a parent could complain about reading “Romeo and Juliet,” as heterosexual attraction remains central to the story. 

Watkins also referenced Shakespeare’s romantic comedy “Twelfth Night,” in which a woman disguises herself as a man to work for a nobleman whom she comes to fall in love with. In this case, gender identity and sexual orientation are similarly crucial to a full discussion of the play, Watkins said. 

"The Shakespeare Company performed (Twelfth Night) for our school last year, and it was an incredible experience for myself and my students,” Watkins said. “I foresee that this bill would put a stop to experiences like that.”

Grace Howat, a policy analyst at the Idaho Family Policy Center, said the change was needed due to public schools allowing employees to provide instruction in sexual orientation and gender identity from a “progressive or secular perspective that misleads children.” 

Woodward, continuing the line of questioning he had for Hawkins, questioned Howat about how the state should square school districts' ability to make determinations about how sexual orientation is taught if the Idaho Legislature passed a total ban on this instruction. 

“If you were writing a bill, and you knew that there were two sections of conflicting code, would you revise the existing code so that there was not a situation that forces us into the court to resolve it?” Woodward said. 

Howat, qualifying that she was not familiar with the older statute cited by Woodward, said she would likely add a “notwithstanding clause,” which allows laws to take precedence over other potentially conflicting laws.

Quinn Perry, deputy director of the Idaho School Board Association, said the age-appropriateness standard is used “meaningfully to engage in certain types of instruction.” She referred to one instance where an Idaho Falls high school government teacher had to consult their superintendent and then legal counsel about teaching the recent docket of Supreme Court cases, which broached issues of gender identity and sexual orientation.  

Legal counsel then determined that this subject matter was “age appropriate” and, after receiving opt-in permission from parents to allow instruction, could be taught in the classroom, Perry said. 

“I think if we remove that sentence, then I think it's very problematic, especially with the private cause of action that is in there,” Sen. Janie Ward-Engelking said. “I think that particular age-appropriate sentence is important. It's not nothing.”

Sen. Van Burtenshaw, R-Terreton, motioned to hold the bill in the committee at the call of the chair, citing the comments provided by Perry on the matter.

“There's enough confusion on this whole thing that for me, I think it needs more discussion,” Burtenshaw said.