Transgender Idaho residents sue to block state bathroom ban set for July
Six transgender Idaho residents filed a federal lawsuit challenging a new state law that bans people from using bathrooms, locker rooms or changing areas that do not correspond with their sex assigned at birth, a change supporters say is intended to protect women and children. The plaintiffs asked a federal judge to declare the ban unconstitutional as the law is scheduled to take effect in July.
The lawsuit says the law is set up to apply broadly, including in privately owned businesses that serve the public. Under the statute as described in the court filing, a person who knowingly enters a bathroom, locker room or changing area that does not match their sex assigned at birth could face criminal penalties, with misdemeanor exposure for a first offense and felony exposure for a second offense.
One plaintiff, Diego Fable, said he had not had trouble using men’s facilities before the law, but argued the new rules would force him to use women’s facilities. Fable said that would “only invite suspicion, questions, and raised eyebrows,” describing a choice he would face each time he leaves home, including situations such as eating out with friends or using public parks.
Fable also said in the lawsuit that the options available to him at work and in local grocery stores and some restaurants, conference centers and gas stations are multi-occupancy facilities. He said other people also perceive him as a man and that he worries about violence if he uses a women’s restroom facility under the law’s requirements.
The lawsuit argues that complying with the ban would be isolating, according to Fable’s statement in the filing. He said he sees the “only safe option” as staying home or leaving the state, adding that the choice would mean leaving behind friends and the community he described as treasured.
Other plaintiffs described different practical impacts. Peter Poe, described in the lawsuit as a transgender man with a beard, said using a women’s restroom would be disruptive. Amelia Milette, described as a transgender woman, said her job requires her to help clients at their own offices and that many of those offices do not have gender-neutral restrooms, which she said would push her to change routines such as limiting food and liquid consumption to reduce the need to use public restrooms.
The case names Idaho’s attorney general, Raúl Labrador, and multiple county prosecutors as defendants. In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal, said the ban would cause emotional harm and could exacerbate gender dysphoria, and they argued it could also lead to medical problems by forcing people to avoid using restrooms.
Plaintiffs also challenged the law on legal grounds that include claims that it is overly vague and discriminates based on sex and transgender status. They further argued the statute violates constitutional privacy rights because it would force them to disclose their transgender status, according to the lawsuit.
In a statement cited in the filing, Barbara Schwabauer, a senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Rights Project, said the law is “a dangerous and discriminatory effort to push transgender people out of public life.” Schwabauer said her legal team would seek to have the law blocked entirely, adding that if people could not use the restroom at work they could not go to work and that if they could not use restrooms at school they could not go to school.
Idaho Republican Sen. Ben Toews, one of the sponsors of the legislation, said in March that the law was needed to protect women and children. Toews said transgender people could instead use a single-occupancy gender-neutral restroom if they wanted, and supporters’ statements are part of what the lawsuit seeks to overturn in federal court.