Amends existing law to remove a provision regarding restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons.
House Bill 376 amends Idaho’s concealed weapons statute, section 18-3302, Idaho Code. The bill’s central change is to remove a provision that restricted the carrying of concealed weapons on certain public property that is normally and habitually open to the public, while preserving the ability of private property owners, tenants, employers, and businesses to set their own rules. The bill also states that this limitation supersedes the Idaho Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Herndon v. City of Sandpoint.
Beyond that targeted change, the bill restates and preserves the broader concealed-carry licensing framework in Idaho. It continues to define concealed weapons and deadly weapons, maintain licensing requirements and exemptions, set application, fingerprinting, background-check, training, renewal, fee, and revocation procedures, and preserve reciprocity efforts with other states. It also keeps the existing criminal penalty for unlawful concealed carry and the emergency effective date of July 1, 2025.
The bill would directly amend section 18-3302, Idaho Code, by narrowing the circumstances in which public property owners and political subdivisions may restrict concealed carry on public property that is ordinarily open to the public. It leaves intact the private-property rights language and the rest of Idaho’s concealed-carry licensing and enforcement scheme, including sheriff-issued licenses, background checks, disqualifying conditions, renewal rules, and reciprocity provisions. The bill also expressly overrides the Herndon v. City of Sandpoint decision as to the affected subsection.
The recorded vote suggests the bill was generally supported in the House, passing third reading 56-10. No committee transcript was provided, so there is no direct record here of floor debate or committee discussion. Based on the vote and the bill’s sponsor committee, the measure appears to have had substantial support among House members, with a smaller bloc opposed.
The main point of contention is the bill’s expansion of concealed-carry rights on public property that is normally open to the public, especially because it limits the ability of cities, counties, and other political subdivisions to impose additional restrictions. Opponents are likely to have focused on public safety, local control, and the impact on government-owned facilities used for public events, while supporters likely emphasized state preemption, firearm rights, and consistency with Idaho’s broad concealed-carry framework. The explicit supersession of Herndon v. City of Sandpoint is also a notable legal flashpoint.