Six transgender residents sue Idaho after state criminalizes use of bathrooms

Six transgender residents in Idaho have launched a federal lawsuit challenging the state’s new, highly restrictive bathroom ban, which is set to take effect in July.

The plaintiffs are seeking a judicial declaration that the law, considered the strictest of its kind nationwide, is unconstitutional.

The legislation mandates that individuals use public restrooms, locker rooms, or changing areas corresponding to the sex assigned to them at birth, even within privately owned businesses.

Violators face severe penalties: a misdemeanor charge and up to a year in jail for a first offense, escalating to a felony with a potential five-year prison sentence for subsequent infractions.

Represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Lambda Legal, the plaintiffs argue the law forces them into an impossible choice: either remain confined to their homes or risk harassment, assault, or arrest when attempting to use public facilities.

Diego Fable, one of the plaintiffs, shared his experience in a news release, “I’ve been enjoying life as a man and using the men’s restrooms hasn’t been a big deal. But this law would force me to use the women’s facilities, and doing so would only invite suspicion, questions, and raised eyebrows. I would have to face tough choices every time I leave my home: Do I know the restroom situation when I go out to eat with my friends? Do I know the restrooms available when I go to public parks to go birding? What do I do while I’m at work all day?”

Republican Sen. Ben Toews, a key sponsor of the legislation, asserted in March that the law was necessary to safeguard women and children. He suggested transgender individuals could simply opt for single-occupancy gender-neutral restrooms.

However, the lawsuit highlights the scarcity of such facilities.

Fable noted that his workplace, local grocery stores, and many other public venues primarily offer multi-occupancy gendered restrooms.

Perceived by others as a man, Fable fears violence if compelled to use women’s facilities as the new law dictates. “Ultimately, complying with this law would be extremely isolating,” Fable stated.

“The only safe option truly available is to just stay home, or leave the state entirely, leaving my treasured friends and community behind.”

Other plaintiffs echoed these concerns. Peter Poe, a transgender man with a beard, anticipates disruption if forced into women’s restrooms.

Amelia Milette, a transgender woman whose job requires client visits, often finds these offices lack gender-neutral options. She plans to restrict her food and liquid intake to minimize the need for public restroom use if the law is enacted.

Idaho is among at least 19 states with laws restricting transgender individuals from using bathrooms and changing rooms aligned with their gender in schools and, in some cases, other public spaces.

The Movement Advancement Project, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group, notes that Florida, Kansas, and Utah have introduced criminal penalties for violating bathroom laws under certain conditions.

Yet, Idaho’s legislation stands out for its expansive reach, applying broadly to private businesses under the definition of a “place of public accommodation.”

The law does include nine exceptions, such as for janitorial work, emergency responses, assisting children, or instances of “dire need.”

The plaintiffs contend the ban will inflict emotional harm, worsen gender dysphoria, and potentially lead to medical issues like kidney and urinary tract infections due to forced restroom avoidance.

They argue the law is excessively vague, discriminatory based on sex and transgender status, and infringes upon their constitutional right to privacy by compelling them to disclose their transgender identity.

Barbara Schwabauer, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Rights Project, condemned the measure, stating: “This law is a dangerous and discriminatory effort to push transgender people out of public life.”

Schwabauer affirmed the ACLU’s intention to seek a complete block on the law, emphasizing, “If you cannot use the restroom at work, you cannot go to work. If you cannot use the restroom at school, you cannot go to school.”

Attorney General Raúl Labrador, along with several county prosecutors, is named as a defendant in the case. Labrador’s office conveyed its stance in an email to The Associated Press, stating, “We look forward to defending the law.”