Here are some of the key headlines from nearly the end of this year’s Idaho legislative session (these from the Idaho Capital Sun) about some of the highest-profile, and apparently priority, legislation of the time.
Idaho governor signs bill to criminalize trans people using bathrooms that align with their identity.
Boise removes LGBTQ+ pride flag as Idaho governor signs bill to fine city for its display.
Idaho Legislature passes bill to force teachers, doctors to out transgender minors to their parents. This one hasn’t been signed by the governor yet, but bearing in mind recent history you’d be unwise to bet against it.
The subject of gender runs through all, and it echoes through many more pieces of legislation - in a few cases, even the budgets - in this year’s Idaho session. In the legislature’s online subject index for bills and resolutions, 11 measures this session were listed under the heading “gender.”
The nature of some of the failed legislation this session was important too. Some of it up front was expected to fail because the ideas have been rejected by the Idaho Legislature year after year, such as Senate Bill 1228 which sought “to provide that freedom from discrimination because of sexual orientation or gender identity is a civil right”; it got no further than a Senate committee.
Then there was House Joint Memorial 17, which did die in the Senate but only after clearing the House on a solid 44-26 vote. This one called on the Supreme Court of the United States to reverse the decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which declared a right to same-sex marriage.
One by one, you could make the argument (and reading the statements of purpose, you might think) these measures have disparate subjects. But the context, the overall environment in which the legislating is happening, tells us otherwise. These measures have little to do with flags or marriage or bathrooms or medical procedures.
Collectively they are intended as a cultural statement, that the Idaho Legislature as a whole dislikes and disapproves of a significant segment of the state’s citizenry, and wants to make that stance clear.
One of the presumptive personal targets of all this would be Melissa Sue Robinson of Nampa, a transgender person who has been an Idaho candidate for office several times in recent years, this year seeking the Libertarian Party nomination for governor. Speaking as founder of the National Association for the Advancement of Transgender People, she said of the bathroom bill that it is “not about safety - it is about control, fear, and the systematic erasure of transgender people from public life. Idaho has crossed a dangerous line by turning everyday existence into a criminal act. … We will not stand by while our community is criminalized.” She might have said as much about several of the other bills.
The results of the legislation, she said, could “encourage harassment and profiling, put transgender individuals at risk of violence, create confusion and fear for businesses and law enforcement, and trigger costly legal battles that Idaho taxpayers will ultimately fund.”
You get the sense that for many legislators all this seems more feature than bug - that they wouldn’t disagree with most of Robinson’s points, but see little problem with them. These seem not to be legislators interested in looking out for all of the people of their state, but only some, and disregarding others - second-class citizens who they would rather go somewhere else.
Such a statement might have been too strong for a fair conclusion even two or three years ago. Today it is not.
If you are not in one of the targeted groups and think you have no cause for concern, remember this: A precedent is being set. If legislators can come for one group of people, they can come for another. Watch out.
(image/Luis Alvaz)
