A federal judge in Idaho has temporarily blocked a controversial state law that would have made it a crime for transgender individuals to use restrooms that do not align with their sex assigned at birth. The ruling, handed down Tuesday by U.S. District Judge Amanda Brailsford, halts enforcement of the law just days before it was set to take effect on July 1.
The preliminary injunction came in response to a lawsuit filed by six transgender Idaho residents, who argued the measure violated their constitutional rights. Brailsford, a Biden appointee, wrote that the law is likely unconstitutional, citing its vague language and reliance on subjective enforcement by police officers.
“It does not identify any objective benchmark, specify what evidence may establish such a need, or explain how an officer is to assess whether the exception applies,” Brailsford wrote in her order. She noted that the law fails to provide law enforcement with “sufficient standards” for determining when someone has a “dire need” or “reasonably available” alternative restroom.
The judge added that the statute could lead to inconsistent enforcement, with different officers reaching different conclusions about identical conduct. “Different officers could reasonably reach different conclusions regarding identical conduct, not because the facts differ, but because the statute furnishes no standards by which those facts are to be evaluated,” she wrote.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which filed the lawsuit on behalf of the plaintiffs, praised the ruling. Paul Carlos Southwick, legal director of the ACLU of Idaho, said the decision eases fears among transgender residents. “This ruling means trans folks in Idaho can continue participating in public life without the threat of being arrested for using the bathroom,” Southwick said in a statement. “Trans Idahoans have been understandably anxious about the disruption this unconstitutional law would cause in their daily lives.”
The ACLU also highlighted opposition from law enforcement groups, including the Idaho Fraternal Order of Police and the Idaho Chiefs of Police Association, who argued the law lacked a clear method for determining a person’s sex during field encounters without resorting to invasive searches or questioning.
Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador, a Republican, vowed to appeal the order. In a statement, he called the decision “results-driven” and accused the judge of misapplying the law. “Biological sex is not vague, and neither is this law,” Labrador said. “The good news is that this ruling is narrow. Idaho’s law remains enforceable in most settings, including changing rooms and many restrooms. The injunction applies only in limited circumstances and to certain people.”
The case adds to a growing legal battle over transgender rights, as the Supreme Court is expected to weigh in on similar bans in the coming months. The high court’s upcoming decisions on transgender issues could reshape the legal landscape for such laws nationwide. Meanwhile, the Biden administration has signaled support for transgender protections, a stance that could influence future rulings.
The Idaho law is among several measures across the country targeting transgender individuals, particularly in schools and public facilities. Critics argue these laws are discriminatory and harmful, while supporters claim they protect privacy and safety. The injunction will remain in effect while the lawsuit proceeds, offering temporary relief to transgender Idahoans.
