Idaho
Judge blocks Idaho ban on providing hormones to transgender inmates, as lawsuit continues
A federal judge issued an injunction blocking the state of Idaho from enforcing House Bill 668, a law banning the use of public funds to provide gender-affirming care.
In March, the state legislature passed a law banning Medicaid or private insurance for state employees from covering gender-affirming health care, including medication and surgeries. The law, also known as the No Funds for Gender Transition Act, also bars governmental health care providers and public facilities from being used for such care.
In July, three incarcerated transgender women and the ACLU filed a lawsuit saying denying them necessary medical treatment violated prisoners’ “Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment.”
To qualify for a preliminary injunction, plaintiffs must show they are “likely to suffer imminent, irreparable harm.”
On Tuesday, Chief U.S. District Court Judge David Nye ruled the plaintiffs ”raised serious questions” on the merits of their claim and showed that, without an injunction, they would be likely to suffer irreversible harm while the case makes its way through the courts.
The law prohibits offering hormone therapy to inmates, even if it has been prescribed by a medical professional.
“There is no dispute that Gender Dysphoria is a serious medical need,” the judge wrote in his memorandum. The parties disagree on whether or not denying hormones to inmates with gender dysphoria poses a risk to their health.
“The Court recognizes that the challenged statute prohibits the use of State funds for hormone therapy, not necessarily the therapy itself. However, for incarcerated individuals with no source of income, the ban on using State funds is the functional equivalent of a ban on therapy,” Nye noted.
The judge also ruled the plaintiffs showed sufficient evidence for a class action lawsuit and granted their request for certification.
“There are between sixty and seventy individuals in IDOC custody who have been diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria, and that fifty-four of those individuals—including the named Plaintiffs—were receiving hormone therapy as treatment for their diagnoses before [the law] took effect,” the memorandum reads.
The case only challenges the refusal to provide hormonal therapy to inmates, not the law’s prohibition on gender-affirming surgeries.
Two of the plaintiffs initially filed the lawsuit under the pseudonyms Jane Roe and Jane Poe but have since decided to use their legal names.
In a statement released by the ACLU, primary plaintiff Katie Heredia said she did not join the lawsuit for recognition.
“I’m doing it because it has to be done,” she said. “We are just normal people who happen to be trans. We have medical conditions and deserve access to medical treatment.”
Boise State Public Radio reached out to the office of Attorney General Raúl Labrador for comment and will update this story as it develops.
PAYETTE — A Payette mom’s bond was revoked Tuesday after she was charged with suffocating her twin children earlier this month and is believed to pose a danger to the life of her newborn child.
The case, which has drawn national headlines, concerns Andrea Renee Shaw, a 23-year-old Payette mother who in May 2025 said her 18-month-old fraternal twins died the same day, after receiving routine childhood vaccinations. In January, Shaw joined as a plaintiff in a federal lawsuit filed by Children’s Health Defense, an anti-vaccine organization founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., with several other plaintiffs claiming vaccine injury or death.
Kennedy, who now serves as secretary of Health and Human Services, is no longer part of the group after taking on the cabinet position, as was reported by the Associated Press.
In Idaho, the twins’ deaths prompted a 14-month investigation by the Payette County Sheriff’s Department. On June 29, the investigation yielded a grand jury indictment of Shaw on two counts of first-degree murder by suffocation. If convicted, Shaw can be punished by up to life in prison or the death penalty, and the court would have the ability to order the penalties be served consecutively, or back to back.
Tuesday’s arraignment at the Payette County Courthouse was primarily attended by Shaw’s relatives and members of the media. Payette County Judge Kiley Stuchlik, who serves Idaho’s Third Judicial District, presided.
A key consideration for Stuchlik on Tuesday was a request from Joseph Filicetti, the legal counsel for Shaw, to have her bond reduced from $2 million to $100,000. Filicetti said this would allow for Shaw to care for a newborn girl, who, according to court documents, was born by caesarean section on June 25, four days prior to Shaw’s grand jury indictment.
State prosecutors objected to the motion for bond reduction, noting at hand was a potential death penalty case and asserting, unlike her husband, Shaw’s story repeatedly changed during questioning. Prosecuting Attorney Mike Duke said releasing Shaw would ultimately put the newborn’s safety at risk.
“That child is the most at risk. We do not think she should be allowed to be anywhere near any children, let alone her own children,” Duke said.
Stuchlik decided to revoke bond entirely, stating Shaw posed a “risk of safety” to the newborn child that was not known to Stuchlik or prosecutors when the $2 million bond was initially set.
Also for consideration Tuesday was a request to have grand jury transcripts of witness testimony provided to prosecutors and defense counsel to prepare their respective cases.
Idaho
Idaho is home to the nation's first DarkSky Reserve. Now it's home to the nations first DarkSky Certified Resort
IDAHO FALLS, Idaho (KIFI) – A controversy is brewing as the City of Idaho Falls reviews its alcohol ordinance.
The goal is to consolidate four existing ordinances for beer, wine and liquor into a single law and ensure compliance with state code.
However, at its meeting last Thursday, the Idaho Falls City Council unanimously voted to remove the proposed ordinance from its agenda, in order to receive and consider additional public comment.
The proposed ordinance would:
1. Require commercial establishments selling, dispensing or permitting consumption of alcohol – including beer, wine or liquor – to have an alcohol license, alcohol catering permit or a charitable event permit.
2. Business events with 20 or less employees consuming alcohol at the business would be allowed.
3. Require alcohol servers to complete training every three years.
4. Individuals who violate the law could be charged with a misdemeanor.
Idaho Falls City Council President Jim Francis said the changes were the culmination of months of collaboration between law enforcement, business owners and city attorneys.
“We wanted to provide a safe environment – the primary point here – for public gatherings,” Francis said. “We recognize that certain antiquated elements of the current code are overly restrictive and needed to be addressed. We wanted to make the code more accessible to the public. We needed to address over-pouring issues. We wanted to reduce penalties where possible for violations, particularly the first offenses, and yet make the code clear enough to be enforceable consistently by law enforcement.”
But City Council Member John Radford said the changes represent an overreach by city government.
“I believe it’s a bad policy. What problem are we solving in the name of trying to solve a non-problem?” Radford said. “We’re becoming big brother around alcohol in your private property. I’m concerned that landlords will be at risk of being charged with a misdemeanor if they knowingly, which I made sure that was in there, because that is what we’ve been talking about, allowed people to drink in our business. We will be outside the norm of Idaho cities. This is a big step, and I don’t think the public has weighed in on this.”
At a City Council Work Session on June 1, Idaho Falls Chief of Police Bryce Johnson cited an increase in alcohol-related crime – particularly downtown – as a reason for the changes.
“DUI is there, but this would include sexual assaults, assaults, batteries, disturbances, urination, public vandalism, shooting – all sorts of crimes,” Johnson said.
But business owners are concerned about the potential impact on commercial enterprises.
“The ordinance doesn’t address the real problem – which is people drinking … at one event and then showing up in a bar or restaurant already hammered and causing problems anyway,” ” said Terri Ireland, representing the Idaho Falls Downtown Merchants Association. “The industry is really well-regulated by state and local laws already.”
The City of Idaho Falls began the process of updating its alcohol ordinance in January 2026, seeking input from community stakeholders.
Multiple community members spoke out about the ordinance.
For more in-depth information, you can read the full 39-page proposed alcohol ordinance here.
-
Mississippi2 minutes agoHow permanent daylight saving time would impact Mississippi
-
Missouri8 minutes agoMissouri reports 43 cases of parasitic infection that’s sickened thousands nationwide
-
Montana14 minutes agoGovernor Gianforte Announces Montana Ranks as Top 10 State for Job Growth
-
Nebraska20 minutes agoRoanoke County teen heads to national rodeo finals in Nebraska
-
Nevada26 minutes agoNevada’s modern boomtowns are these fast-growing cities, study said
-
New Hampshire32 minutes agoNH Forests: A Story of Revival and the Challenges Ahead: Business NH Magazine
-
New Jersey38 minutes agoNJ Spine Doctor, Daughter, Granddaughter Killed In Plane Crash, Police Say
-
New Mexico44 minutes agoMcCauley Springs Fire Reaches 100% Containment
