Dear Friends,

Yesterday, in Roe v. Critchfield, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld a district court decision in support of Idaho’s law that mandates separate-sex facilities in public schools, like bathrooms and other areas with expectations of privacy.  Idaho’s common-sense law for now can be enforced as intended, protecting the safety, privacy and dignity of Idaho students.

Last March, Idaho enacted Senate Bill 1100 which protected children’s privacy by ensuring that sex-specific facilities in K-12 public schools like showers, locker rooms, restrooms, and overnight accommodations remained sex-specific, while also allowing single-user facilities. But activists sued Idaho State Superintendent of Public Instruction Debbie Critchfield and the State Board of Education last July, demanding that K-12 public schools force girls to share private spaces with males and vice-versa.  As your Attorney General, I represented Superintendent Critchfield and the State Board of Education in defense of Idaho’s law.

We initially won at the federal district court level when Judge David Nye denied a motion for preliminary injunction from the Plaintiffs who claimed irreparable harm by having to use facilities that corresponded with their biological sex.  This ruling was appealed by the Plaintiffs to the Ninth Circuit and that court granted a temporary injunction while this case was being argued, effectively putting Idaho’s law on hold.   My office, aided by counsel from the Alliance Defending Freedom, argued this case in December of last year.

In yesterday’s decision, the Ninth Circuit wrote that it saw “no argument at this stage that [Idaho law’s] mandatory segregation of [showers and overnight stays] on the basis of ‘biological sex’ is not substantially related to the State’s interests in: (1) not exposing students to the unclothed bodies of students of the opposite sex; and (2) protecting students from having to expose their own unclothed bodies to students of the opposite sex.”  By upholding the denial of a preliminary injunction, the Ninth Circuit also acknowledged the Plaintiffs in Roe v. Critchfield were not likely to succeed on the merits of their case.

The reality is that boys and girls are different. Trying to force a fundamental change in the most basic concept of biology by putting a male into a girls’ locker room isn’t safe or dignified, or respectful of anyone.  Children suffering from gender dysphoria need compassion, support, and competent counseling. But to enable and perpetuate their condition by putting other kids at risk and removing everyone’s privacy and dignity is simply unacceptable.  Idaho’s law drew a very clear line on this issue, and I was proud to successfully defend it.

Idaho has led the way, pushing back against the gender identity agenda.   Idaho was the first state to pass a law keeping men from participating in women’s sports.  Idaho was the first state to pass a law to stop gender transition surgeries and procedures for minors.  Despite being challenged by activists, many of these laws across the country are being affirmed by higher courts and are now supported by a new Administration that isn’t caving to the gender identity movement.

I won’t stop fighting for Idaho.  Our laws are the voice of our people, expressed through our legislature and the statutes they pass on our behalf.  Those who oppose Idaho’s laws – regardless of the topic – have shown a willingness to engage in endless lawfare to get their way.  As your Attorney General, I will make sure that Idaho’s laws have the very best defense against activist agendas, every time.

Best regards,

Not yet subscribed to the Labrador Letter?  Click HERE to get our weekly newsletter and updates.  Miss an issue?  Labrador Letters are archived on the Attorney General website.