The Idaho Legislature concluded its 2025 legislative session this month after passing hundreds of bills into law, many of which focused on changes to education systems.
Some received national attention, including House Bill 93, which will provide a "school choice" tax credit for those who send their students to schools outside the public education system, and even received support from President Donald Trump. Idaho Gov. Brad Little signed it into law in February.
But plenty of other education laws passed this year, including Senate Bill 1044, which will bring cursive back into public schools by adding a handwriting proficiency requirement.
Here are several other bills passed into law that will impact education in Idaho.
LIMITING PHONES
Senate Bill 1032 adds a "Distraction-Free Learning" chapter to state law. It passed the Senate 34-0 (one excused) and the House 65-0 (five members excused). Little signed it on March 13.It requires all school boards and public charter schools in the state to adopt an electronic communications device policy by Dec. 31. The policies need to "emphasize that student use of electronic communications devices be as limited as possible in school buildings and on school grounds or premises during school hours." The law doesn't require districts to ban students from carrying phones at school, but does allow it.
SCHOOL SAFETY
House Bill 224, which was signed into law on March 14 after unanimously passing both chambers (one senator was excused), requires school boards to create and maintain emergency plans for each school. In addition to requiring background checks for anyone who interacts unsupervised with K-12 students, emergency safety plans must be developed with local staff and law enforcement agencies, and reviewed yearly. The law also requires all school district staff receive yearly training on the plans.
Sponsor Rep. Chris Mathias, D-Boise, told the Senate Education Committee this was a housekeeping measure to clarify existing law.
BANNING 'POLITICAL' FLAGS
House Bill 41, which passed on party lines with Republicans in support and Democrats opposed, prohibits public schools from flying specific flags or banners on school property.
The law states that "no flags or banners that represent political, religious, or ideological views, including but not limited to political parties, race, gender, sexual orientation, or political ideologies, may be displayed on public school property such as classrooms, hallways, entryways, or sports fields."
This means, for example, that schools and teachers cannot display Pride flags. But it's unclear whether the law also impacts posters that say "Everyone is Welcome Here" and feature hands with different skin tones, such as the one the Idaho Statesman has reported the West Ada School District told a Meridian world civilization teacher to remove from her classroom.
The law specifically allows schools to display the U.S. flag; official U.S. state flags; official flags of other countries "with which the United States is not engaged in hostile action;" those of U.S. military branches, the "official flags of Idaho Indian tribes," and other flags related to school mascots, colors, and achievements.
IMMUNIZATIONS
House Bill 290 removes most instances of the word "required" from the chapters of state law that describe the immunizations needed for children who attend day care and public school.
However, the law still states "all children require the following" vaccines, including the DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus and a-cellular pertussis), hepatitis A and B, MMR (measles, mumps and rubella), polio and varicella. Those entering seventh grade also require a DTaP booster and meningococcal vaccine, with the second dose of meningococcal vaccine required later.
The law states school authorities shall exclude students who don't meet those requirements, but includes exemptions: a physician may sign a note stating a student can't be immunized because it would endanger their life or health, or parents/guardians (or students who are 18 or older) may submit a signed statement objecting to immunization requirements "on religious or other grounds."
CAMPUS FREE SPEECH
House Bill 240, or the "Protecting Campus Free Speech in Higher Education Act," adds a chapter to state law emphasizing the importance of the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, including free speech.
Under the law, public higher education institutions can't limit free speech to specific outdoor areas or "free speech zones," but can enforce "reasonable time, place and manner restrictions" as long as they are content-neutral. Schools aren't allowed to charge security fees to students or student organizations based on the content of or anticipated reaction to the speech. Schools also "shall maintain a policy prohibiting student-on-student harassment."
Students or student organizations who feel their free speech rights have been violated may file a legal action against the school within one year of an incident, and if the court finds in their favor, they could receive up to $25,000, plus attorney fees and reasonable court costs.
SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY
House Bill 352 requires public schools to adopt procedures and policies prohibiting K-12 "classroom instruction" on sexual orientation or gender identity.
The bill, which Little signed into law on March 31, passed the House 58-11 (one excused), and the Senate 29-6.
"This bill ensures that parents can choose when and how to teach their children about these issues," Sen. Cindy Carlson, R-Riggins, told the Senate Education Committee in mid-March.
Sen. Jim Woodward, R-Sagle, asked whether the bill would prohibit a school counselor from speaking to a student about these issues. The bill's co-sponsor, Rep. Dale Hawkins, R-Fernwood, said he wasn't sure, since this legislation just deals with classroom instruction.
Chris Parri, with the Idaho Education Association (the state's teacher's union), testified against the bill.
"Under this legislation, entire chapters of American history would be scrubbed from public education," Parri told the committee. "Much like there's no way to teach about slavery without talking about racism, there's no way to teach about the Stonewall riots, AIDS epidemic, or the assassination of Harvey Milk without talking about sexual orientation and gender identity."
Idaho Freedom Foundation's Samuel Lair testified in favor.
"Quite simply, I believe that these topics just don't belong in our public education," Lair told the committee. "I think we need to focus on math, reading, science, social studies — the basic functions of what it takes to be a literate and educated member of society, and leave these contentious topics elsewhere."
State resident Jeffrey Watkins pointed out in testimony that heterosexual relationships also fall under "sexual orientation," and asked lawmakers if the legislation opens schools up to complaints about teaching works such as Romeo and Juliet, or lessons on the different societal expectations for men and women during World War II, which could fall under gender identity.
SEX ED VS. HUMAN SEXUALITY
House Bill 239, signed into law on March 31, makes a distinction between "human sexuality" and "sex education" and requires parents receive a two-week notice of any instruction on human sexuality, which they must specifically opt their students in for.
Parents could already opt kids out of sex education, defined as "the study of the anatomy and the physiology of human reproduction."
The new "opt-in" applies to "human sexuality" instruction, defined as "sexual conduct, sexual pleasure, sexual intimacy, sexual abuse, sexual violence, eroticism, pornography, deviant sexual behavior, sexual attraction, sexual orientation, or any form of sexual identity, gender identity, gender ideology, or gender conversion."
"This is about consent, not content," the bill's sponsor Rep. Barbara Ehardt, R-Idaho Falls, told the Senate Education Committee. "The parent should be informed."
For example, Ehardt said, if an instructor wants to teach The Kite Runner, which includes a rape scene, they'd need to get parental permission first.
"Would you be able to teach about the signs of sexual abuse or what to do if somebody is being abused, without parental consent?" asked Sen. Janie Ward-Engelking, D-Boise. "Because occasionally, the child's being abused by the parent."
"No doubt there's going to be a child or two, I know there's bound to be kids that are abused," Ehardt replied. "But we don't teach all the kids this and put it in their mind without the consent of the parent, because we might be able to pick up one or two. I don't think that's fair to the parents, and the parents whose child is being abused should have a say in what they want that child to hear."
Public school employees found to have violated the law are "subject to disciplinary action," and parents or guardians can take legal action against school boards that don't rectify the situation. ♦
Colton Rasanen contributed to this article.
