Amends existing law to revise provisions regarding the length and scope of a declaration of emergency by the governor.
House Bill 344 revises Idaho’s disaster emergency law, specifically the governor’s authority during a declared state of disaster emergency. The bill tightens the conditions under which a disaster emergency may be declared, tying that authority to a governor-called special legislative session only when the special session’s stated purpose includes the disaster emergency. It also limits the duration of a disaster emergency to 30 days unless renewed for another 30 days, and in no case beyond 60 days, unless ended earlier by the governor or terminated by concurrent resolution of the legislature.
The bill preserves the governor’s emergency powers to issue executive orders and proclamations, deploy resources, direct evacuations, control movement in disaster areas, and use or commandeer property when necessary, but it adds a requirement that such orders be essential to protect life or property and narrowly tailored so they do not unnecessarily restrict people’s ability to work, provide for their families, or contribute to the economy. It also expressly prohibits the governor or any state or local entity from imposing new restrictions on firearms or ammunition, suspending concealed carry licenses outside existing law, confiscating firearms or ammunition, or otherwise limiting constitutional rights during an emergency. Finally, it states that the governor may not alter, adjust, or create provisions of the Idaho Code during a disaster emergency.
The bill amends Section 46-1008, Idaho Code, which governs the governor’s powers in disaster emergencies. Its main legal effect is to narrow and clarify the scope of emergency declarations, impose a hard cap on the length of a declared disaster emergency, and codify limits on emergency orders that could affect work, commerce, constitutional rights, or firearms-related activities. It also reinforces legislative oversight by preserving the legislature’s ability to end an emergency by concurrent resolution. The act takes effect July 1, 2025, under an emergency clause.
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to reflect a generally restrictive or skeptical view of broad executive emergency authority, especially in relation to economic activity, constitutional rights, and firearms. The absence of recorded committee debate or votes limits the ability to identify a broader range of viewpoints, but the bill’s structure suggests support for stronger legislative checks and narrower emergency powers. The emergency clause indicates the sponsors viewed the changes as urgent.
The most likely points of contention are the bill’s limits on the governor’s emergency powers and its explicit firearms protections. Supporters would likely emphasize the need to prevent open-ended emergency declarations, protect the ability to work and conduct business, and ensure that constitutional rights are not curtailed during crises. Opponents may argue that the 60-day cap and the restrictions on executive action could reduce flexibility in responding to prolonged or evolving disasters, and that the firearms provisions are unusually broad for an emergency-management statute. The bill also conditions disaster declarations on the governor’s use of a special session proclamation, which could be seen as an additional procedural constraint on executive authority.