BOISE, Idaho — One of the most heated debates at the Idaho Capitol this session centers on who belongs in which spaces—and who gets to decide.

House Bill 264 aims to restrict access to bathrooms, changing rooms, dorms, and shelters based on biological sex, not gender identity. Supporters argue that the bill is intended to protect privacy and safety.

“Protecting female spaces really is a continuation of a lot of the things that we have done as Idahoans… men should not be in our private spaces,” said Rep. Barbara Ehardt (R). “Imagine if you sent your daughter to go to the university and she found out that for a year her roommate was going to be a biological male who identified as a female. That’s not right.”

Critics, however, counter that the bill targets an issue that is not grounded in Idaho reality and could create more problems than it solves.

“I don’t think they’re going to increase women’s comfort level by forcing trans men into women’s bathrooms, which is what this bill does,” said Rep. Ilana Rubel (D). “This one in particular on the bathrooms is… extremely misguided. I think a lot of the folks in here are legislating without ever having really known a trans person in their life.”

Rubel also noted that there is no record of assault by a trans woman in Idaho bathrooms and expressed concerns that the bill could lead to costly lawsuits. “At best, it’s a total waste of time that is a distraction from the real needs of the people of Idaho,” she added.

Another bill, HB 239, is gaining attention as it would require parents to actively opt their child into any sexual content in classes, as opposed to the current system that allows them to opt-out.

“The opt-in is really about consent, not content,” Ehardt said. She believes the change empowers parents after hearing what she described as alarming stories from families. “The subject matter being taught really was about self-gratification… My child cannot unsee that,” she continued. “They were role-playing sexual situations… I have story after story.”

Rubel warned that the bill could unintentionally block teens from learning important lessons about their bodies due to possible administrative delays or parents forgetting to opt in. “Whenever you flip things from opt-out to opt-in, you end up losing roughly half the people along the way just from paperwork and administrative hurdles,” she stated.

Additionally, HB 352 would ban any classroom instruction touching on sexual orientation or gender identity from kindergarten through high school. Supporters assert that the classroom is not an appropriate setting for such discussions.

“We don’t want teachers… allowing the kids to choose another name, other pronouns… this is not something for the school to decide,” Ehardt expressed.

Rubel argued that the line between what is banned and what is allowed is too blurry and risks erasing many students’ identities. “It’s been a disappointing session… very silly culture war issues… not responsive to the actual needs of the people of Idaho,” she concluded.

If you had plans to slap a pair of truck nuts on the back of your F-150 and haul ass to Idaho in hopes of maybe catching some publicly exposed breasts, I’m afraid you may want to change your plans…

The State of Idaho, renowned for its potatoes and… lots of other cool stuff, has passed a new law that has criminalized the public exposure of breasts.

SIGN UP for The Daily OutKick. New Look, Same Attitude.

House Bill 270 as it’s known — although I’d argue that it was a real missed opportunity on the part of the Idaho State legislature not giving it a funny name like the “No Nipples Act” or something — was signed into law by Governor Brad Little this week and is effectively an updating of the state’s pre-existing indecent exposure laws, according to EastIdahoNews.com.

The law states that a person will be charged with a misdemeanor if one exposes “his or her genitals,; exposes developed female breasts, including the areola and nipple; exposes adult male breasts, including the areola and nipple, that have been medically or hormonally altered to appear like developing or developed female breasts; exposes artificial breasts, including the areola and nipple, intended to resemble female breasts; or displays toys or products intended to resemble male or female genitals.”

Wow… they really covered every conceivable base in there, didn’t they? The “It was only my areola and/or nipple” defense will not fly in the great state of Idaho.

But it’s that last part that rules out truck nuts because they count as a toy or product that resembles genitals. This could lead to police getting calls about them, according to Idaho Senate Minority Leader Melissa Wintrow.

“They’re gross, they’re offensive, and kids on the road see them. So why wouldn’t the police get a call and say, ‘That offends me, pull it off the truck?’” Wintrow said. “Because now this bill will allow it. And I talked to police and they said, ‘Indeed it would.’”

There’s an interesting gray area here. Are truck nuts protected speech? Boobs aren’t; especially not on CNN as OutKick founder Clay Travis famously learned.

I don’t know. I’m not a truck nuts guy. They’d look a little goofy on my 2022 Kia Forte… although I’ve never given them a shot; they might look awesome.

Since I don’t live in Idaho, I can still give them the ol’ college truck nuts try.
 

Idaho prosecutors have unveiled a college essay from student murders suspect Bryan Kohberger that shows he knows his way around a crime scene, new court filings reveal.

In the missive, written in 2020 during finals for a 300-level criminal justice course, Kohberger described how crime scene investigators use “fiber-free” overalls, gloves and booties to avoid contaminating the location with their own DNA and fingerprints.

At 1122 King Road, where he allegedly killed four University of Idaho undergrads in November 2022, police have revealed little evidence aside from a Ka-Bar knife sheath found under one of the victims that allegedly had Kohberger’s DNA on the snap.

Before the FBI identified him as a person of interest through investigative genetic genealogy, his name was unknown to detectives. 

He went into other aspects of a crime scene investigation, but repeatedly referenced measures police should take to protect the location, shared his thoughts about circumstantial evidence, identified domestic partners as potential suspects and warned that crime scenes could be staged.

“Prosecutors are going to talk about this when they bring up the lack of forensic evidence left by the killer,” said Joseph Giacalone, a former NYPD cold case investigator and a criminal justice professor at Penn State-Lehigh Valley.

“They’re going to say, ‘Look how much he knew about this. He talks about fiber-free clothing.’”

Kohberger mentioned fiber-free overalls, shoe covers, gloves, hair nets and more when talking about protective gear an investigator should wear to avoid contaminating a scene.

“This is not helpful for him,” Giacalone said.

“The same way he talks about this fictitious cop about not leaving evidence behind…we might have a little insight into how, or at least an answer about, the lack of forensic evidence was left behind,” Giacalone told Fox News Digital. “He doesn’t mention it by name, but Locard’s Exchange Principle, the theory of transfer between all evidence, he does talk about transfer of evidence a number of times throughout this.”

But Kohberger also made some mistakes in the piece, Giacalone said.

“He said staging is common,” Giacalone told Fox News Digital. “It’s not common. You know, most of the things that happen at crime scenes are mistakes or just panic mode.”

He also doesn’t believe that Kohberger, if he committed the crimes as alleged, would have had time to stage the scene after killing four people in roughly 15 minutes, then running into an eyewitness on the way out, who he did not attack.

“I think there’s no way that he didn’t see her,” he said. “So the staging part of this, I don’t find it plausible for him in that scenario.”

Kohberger, who, through his attorneys, has argued there was blood and DNA evidence at the victims’ home that could point to potential alternate perpetrators, wrote in his essay that crime scene investigators don’t have the responsibility of vetting potentially planted evidence.

“Even if there was an item introduced to the scene by an offender to throw off investigators, it is not the job of the criminal investigator processing the crime scene to jump to conclusion,” Kohberger wrote. 

Giacalone said if Kohberger turned in the paper for one of his classes, he’d probably give it a B.

“He knows a lot, but you can get this out of any academic book,” Giacalone said. “You can learn about this, but putting it into practice and doing it are two other things.”

Kohberger graduated from DeSales University with a master’s degree and then went on to Washington State University to pursue a Ph.D. in criminology.

The school is just 10 miles away from the University of Idaho, where he is accused of entering a house at 4 a.m. and killing four of the six students inside on Nov. 13, 2022.

The victims were Madison Mogen, 21, Kaylee Goncalves, 21, Xana Kernodle, 20, and Ethan Chapin, 20.

The three young women were all roommates. Chapin lived nearby and was dating Kernodle.

Kohberger’s trial on four charges of first-degree murder and another of burglary is set to begin on Aug. 11. Jury selection is scheduled for July 30.

A previous judge entered not-guilty pleas on Kohberger’s behalf at an arraignment in May 2023.

He could face the death penalty if convicted.