INDECENCY AND OBSCENITY – Adds to existing law to prohibit a person from entering a restroom or changing room of the opposite sex, to provide a penalty, and to provide exceptions.
House Bill 606 would add a new section to Idaho law making it a crime for a person to knowingly and willfully enter a restroom or changing room in a government-owned building or public accommodation that is designated for the opposite biological sex. A first violation would be a misdemeanor, while a second conviction within five years of the first would be a felony punishable by up to five years in state prison. The bill defines “changing room” broadly to include locker rooms, changing rooms, and shower rooms.
The bill also creates several exceptions. The prohibition would not apply to custodial or maintenance workers, medical responders, law enforcement, emergency or disaster response personnel, people using a single-user facility when no other facility is reasonably available, people using temporarily designated facilities, coaches or athletic trainers during athletic events, or family members, legal guardians, or designated helpers accompanying someone in need of assistance. The act is declared an emergency measure and would take effect on July 1, 2026.
If enacted, the bill would create a new criminal offense in Title 18 of the Idaho Code and expand state criminal law to regulate restroom and changing-room access in government buildings and public accommodations. It would affect individuals, businesses open to the public, and public entities by imposing misdemeanor and repeat-offense felony penalties for entering facilities designated for the opposite biological sex, while also establishing a set of operational exceptions for safety, assistance, and facility-use circumstances.
The available context shows the bill was introduced by the House State Affairs Committee and referred onward without recorded floor debate, committee transcript, or vote history in the provided materials. Based on the bill’s framing and caption, the measure appears to be presented as a public-safety and sex-segregation enforcement bill, but the absence of recorded discussion means there is no documented legislative sentiment in the supplied record beyond its advancement through committee referral.
The central point of contention is likely the bill’s criminal prohibition on restroom and changing-room access based on “opposite biological sex,” which raises privacy, civil-rights, and enforcement concerns for transgender and gender-nonconforming individuals, as well as for public accommodations and government facilities that would need to comply. Supporters would likely emphasize privacy, safety, and maintaining sex-separated facilities, while opponents would likely focus on discrimination, practical enforcement difficulties, and the breadth of the felony penalty for repeat violations. The bill’s exceptions suggest an effort to address emergency, medical, custodial, and assistance-related concerns, but those carveouts may themselves be debated as to whether they are sufficient or workable.