Latest news with #KylePfannenstiel

Federal judge extends block on Idaho gender-affirming care ban in prisons

Yahoo

7 days ago

Health
Yahoo

Federal judge extends block on Idaho gender-affirming care ban in prisons

Idaho Supreme Court hears arguments in abortion ballot initiative lawsuit

Yahoo

25-04-2025

Politics
Yahoo

Idaho Supreme Court hears arguments in abortion ballot initiative lawsuit

In a packed hearing room, the Idaho Supreme Court hears oral arguments in a lawsuit challenging state officials' descriptions of an abortion rights ballot initiative on Friday, April 25, 2025. (Kyle Pfannenstiel/Idaho Capital Sun) The Idaho Supreme Court on Friday heard arguments in a lawsuit that alleges state officials drafted biased and misleading information for voters on an abortion rights ballot initiative. Idahoans United for Women and Families, the group behind the ballot initiative, in January sued, alleging ballot titles and financial analysis — developed by state officials for voters to see — are inaccurate. 'Idahoans need clear and concise information about a proposed ballot initiative's fiscal impact and its purpose to decide whether to say yes or no at the ballot box — based on their understanding, and not on confusion,' said Anne Henderson Haws, an attorney with the law firm Holland & Hart, which is representing the abortion ballot initiative group. 'The fiscal impact statement and the ballot titles prepared for the Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act fail to meet these standards.' As Idaho Legislature winds down, Republican lawmakers maintain strict abortion bans State agencies defend the descriptions — which use 'fetus viability' in one reference, and say the initiative will marginally raise state expenses. The agencies, which wrote the ballot titles and fiscal analysis, say they comply with state law. 'To the extent there's a gap here, I think the gap between their definition and the term fetal variability is worlds larger than the gap between the term fetal viability and fetus viability,' said Idaho Solicitor General Alan Hurst, who works for the Idaho Attorney General's Office. 'And if the two terms are not synonymous — like if fetus favors us slightly, and fetal favors them slightly, which we don't concede — then why is it that the one that's in favor wins out, when the statutory standard is you're not supposed to be either in favor or against?' The ballot initiative proposes abortion exemptions to Idaho's strict abortion ban laws for emergencies, fetal viability and other reproductive health protections. The court will issue a decision at a later date. In 2023, the Idaho Supreme Court ordered the Idaho Attorney General's Office to rewrite ballot titles for an unsuccessful election reform ballot initiative, following a lawsuit. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The ballot titles, developed by the Idaho Office of the Attorney General, are brief descriptions of the initiative. The short title doesn't say that the law would allow emergency abortions after viability, Idahoans United spokesperson Melanie Folwell previously told States Newsroom. And the short title uses the term 'fetus viability,' which is not the medical phrase, the initiative group argues. That conflicts with the long title's use of the term 'fetal viability,' the group argues. Justices repeatedly asked Idaho's solicitor general why the attorney general's office used a different term than the initiative's policy. Hurst said the AG's office believes fetal viability and fetus viability are essentially the same term. At one point, Justice Robyn Brody questioned whether the language was meant to evoke the broader abortion debate. Anti-abortion activists often call fetuses unborn children. But abortion-rights activists often frame abortion in terms of medical freedom for pregnant patients. Hurst then referenced news writing standards by the Associated Press, a prominent international news wire outlet, that advise against using the terms 'pro life' and 'pro choice' in news articles. 'There are no neutral options here. To the extent the neutral options are here, its fetus viability — fetal viability,' Hurst replied. 'That's more favorable to their side than to ours. The AG has not used pro life language in this. He has done his utmost to use language that is consistent with the way the initiative frames things.' Justice Cynthia Meyer soon pointed out that the Attorney General's Office's long title uses the term 'life of the unborn child.' The bigger issue is with the fiscal impact statement, Folwell previously told States Newsroom. The fiscal impact statement says the initiative wouldn't affect taxes or the state's general fund, but it says the initiative could minorly affect state expenses — in Medicaid and prisoner populations. CONTACT US 'Passage of this initiative is likely to cost less than $20,000 per year. The Medicaid budget for providing services was about $850 million in FY2024,' the fiscal impact review said. 'If passed, nominal costs in the context of the affected total budget are insignificant to the state.' Initiative organizers argue that's not true. Justice Colleen Zahn pressed an attorney for Idahoans United on how the initiative wouldn't raise costs, since Idaho pays for Medicaid patients who need care from complications from abortion pills. 'There's no evidence that it would increase costs so as to increase any budget that doesn't already exist,' Henderson Haws said. The fiscal analysis was prepared by the Idaho Division of Financial Management, an agency overseen by Idaho Gov. Brad Little. After filing four proposed policies in August, Idahoans United for Women and Families narrowed its focus down to one policy that would establish a fundamental right to contraception and fertility treatments under Idaho law. That would include: in vitro fertilization; making decisions about pregnancy and childbirth; legalizing abortion before fetal viability; and preserving the right to abortion after viability in medical emergencies. Under the proposed initiative, fetal viability would be determined by a physician and what treatment is available. In the medical community, viability is generally considered to be between 23 to 24 weeks of gestational age. Initiative organizers are collecting signatures in the hopes of qualifying the initiative to be considered by Idaho voters in the November 2026 general election. A ballot initiative is a proposed law that Idaho voters can approve or reject — independent of the Idaho Legislature. Only the Legislature can propose constitutional amendments, unlike many other states. To pass, the initiative would require a simple majority support from voters. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Federal court rejects longer block on Idaho's transgender bathroom restriction law

Yahoo

21-03-2025

Politics
Yahoo

Federal court rejects longer block on Idaho's transgender bathroom restriction law

Protestors on April 2, 2024, dropped 48,000 handmade hearts — meant to represent LGBTQ Idahoans, in protest of anti-LGBTQ legislation — down the rotunda of the Idaho State Capitol Building. (Kyle Pfannenstiel/Idaho Capital Sun) A federal judge panel rejected a longer legal block on Idaho's law to prevent transgender students from using school facilities that match their gender identity. In its opinion, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel rejected a preliminary injunction for Idaho's law, which was requested in the lawsuit Roe v. Critchfield and could have blocked the law during the litigation. In 2023, Idaho passed the law through Senate Bill 1100. Soon after the bill took effect in July 2023, a then-seventh-grade transgender student and Boise High School's Sexuality and Gender Alliance Club sued. In October 2023, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily blocked the law, the Idaho Capital Sun previously reported. But the Idaho Attorney General's Office, in a news release, said Thursday's decision by a panel of judges for the federal circuit court revokes that block, allowing Idaho to enforce the law. In a written statement, Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Peter Renn disagreed, saying the court's temporary block on the law remains in effect. 'The appellate court's injunction against S.B. 1100 still remains in effect while the appeal is pending, and the appeal is still currently pending because the appellate court has not yet issued its mandate,' Renn told the Idaho Capital Sun. 'That mandate will not issue for at least 14 days and potentially longer if there are requests for rehearing.' The Idaho Attorney General's Office did not respond to requests for comment from the Sun asking why the office believed the decision allows Idaho to enforce the law. The temporary federal court block came shortly after a lower federal court judge, Judge David C. Nye for the U.S. District Court of Idaho, rejected a request for a preliminary injunction. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX In its opinion released Thursday, written by Judge Morgan Christen, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Nye's decision to reject a preliminary injunction. The opinion stated the lawsuit's plaintiffs were 'unlikely to succeed on the merits' of their objections to the law, including allegations that the law violates the U.S. Constitution's Equal Protection Clause in the 14th Amendment, federal Title IX law and the right to informational privacy 'by excluding transgender students from facilities matching their gender identity.' 'Applying intermediate scrutiny, the panel held that the State identified an important governmental objective — protecting bodily privacy — and that the State chose permissible means to achieve that objective,' the federal court panel ruled. Idaho's law requires public schools to maintain two separate multi-occupancy restrooms, showers, changing facilities and overnight accommodations for students based on their sex assigned at birth. The law forbids people of one sex from entering facilities designated for another sex, with exceptions for cleaning, medical aid, athletic staff and some other circumstances. 'At this state in the litigation, the panel saw no argument that S.B. 1100's mandatory segregation of these facilities on the basis of 'biological sex' is not substantially related to the State's interest in: (1) not exposing students to the unclothed bodies of students of the opposite sex; and (2) protecting students from having to expose their own unclothed bodies to students of the opposite sex,' the federal opinion stated. In May 2024, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in the lawsuit, Idaho Reports reported. In a written statement, Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador applauded 'the court's decision to allow our State Board of Education to continue its job of preserving each student's privacy, dignity, and safety and providing a quality education for Idaho's children.' 'Idaho's law reflects common sense and biological reality, protecting all students' privacy and safety in spaces like locker rooms and showers,' Labrador wrote. 'Every day, we see more examples of the harms of gender ideology, particularly to women and girls.' Lambda Legal, an LGBTQ+ advocacy law firm representing the plaintiffs, pledged to continue to fight for transgender students' rights. 'This limited ruling is a disappointing but ultimately temporary setback for transgender students across Idaho, who for years have been using school facilities matching their gender identity without incident until Idaho legislators decided to target them for discrimination,' Renn, an attorney with Lambda Legal, said in a written statement. 'Importantly, the court was clear that it was not holding that it would be constitutional to ban transgender students from restrooms, in particular, consistent with their gender identity.' Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian law firm that has agreed to represent Idaho for free in litigation, represented Idaho officials in the case. 'Girls and boys each deserve a private space to shower, undress, use the restroom, and sleep, and they shouldn't have to worry about sharing these spaces with a member of the opposite sex,' the law firm's Senior Counsel Erin Hawley wrote in a statement published by the Idaho Office of the Attorney General. Roe v. Critchfield opinion 3-20-25 SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Judge denies coalition's request to temporarily block Idaho's library law

Yahoo

19-03-2025

Politics
Yahoo

Judge denies coalition's request to temporarily block Idaho's library law

In Preston, the Larsen-Sant Public Library's colorful books line the shelves of its children's book section, accompanied by stuffed animals, like a large purple octopus above the shelves. (Kyle Pfannenstiel/Idaho Capital Sun) Editor's note: This story has been updated to include a quote from Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador. A federal judge has denied an Idaho coalition's request to stop the enforcement of House Bill 710 — a law that took effect in July requiring Idaho public libraries to relocate items that visitors deem harmful to children or risk facing legal action. The same month the law took effect, a coalition of private Idaho schools, privately-funded libraries and parents sued Idaho officials to stop the enforcement of the library law, alleging the law violates the First Amendment rights of private schools and libraries and 14th Amendment protections for the fundamental liberty interest of parents. But Judge Amanda Brailsford on Tuesday denied the plaintiffs' request to block its enforcement, and she dismissed some of the plaintiffs from the case. This case is one of two lawsuits related to House Bill 710, a highly controversial law that took effect after years of attempts from the Idaho Legislature to restrict access to library materials — particularly as they relate to sex education, LGBTQ+ people and diverse communities. These efforts have led librarians to consider leaving Idaho, and it even led at least one rural library to adopt an adults-only policy. There were 11 original plaintiffs in the case; however, Tuesday's decision dismissed eight of them, including four parents and their two children, and two libraries that do not receive public funds, including the Community Library Association and Collister United Methodist Church. The remaining plaintiffs include the Northwest Association of Independent Schools, Sun Valley Community School and the Boise-based Foothills School of Arts and Sciences. Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador said he was pleased with the judge's decision. 'I am pleased the court ruled that Plaintiffs are unlikely to succeed on the merits of this case and are also unlikely to prove that Idaho's law protecting minors from harmful material in schools and public libraries is somehow unconstitutional,' he told the Idaho Capital Sun. 'While the case itself was not dismissed, we will continue to defend Idaho's law as this process continues.' The Idaho Capital Sun has reached out to the plaintiffs' legal team for comment. Recap of House Bill 710 House Bill 710 codified the process that libraries must follow when receiving complaints from adult visitors who believe an item is harmful to minors. Any adult or minor who believes a library item is harmful to minors can provide a written notice to the school or public library asking for its relocation. The library board has 60 days to review the complaint. If the item is deemed harmful to minors, the library must relocate it to an area accessible by adults only. If the library does not relocate the item within the given time frame, then the individual may sue the library and recover at least $250. The plaintiffs alleged the law is overbroad in violation of the First Amendment and vague under the 14th Amendment. The court found the plaintiffs are unlikely to succeed on the merits of those claims and they also fail to show they are likely to suffer irreparable harm while the law is in place. 'The Court does not question the genuineness of Plaintiffs' concerns raised in their affidavits,' Brailsford wrote. 'Schools and public libraries are often pillars of our communities and formative in many of our lives. Regardless, Plaintiffs have yet to show irreparable harm that justifies a preliminary injunction.' New lawsuit seeks to stop enforcement of Idaho library materials bill Brailsford found that the parent plaintiffs do not have standing because the law is not directed at regulating parental decisions. 'H.B. 710 does not prohibit a child, parent, or legal guardian's conduct and does not contain any enforcement provision applicable to them,' Brailsford wrote. 'Rather, the statute only prohibits the conduct of schools and public libraries and only provides for the enforcement of a violation against schools and public libraries.' Likewise, Brailsford said the two libraries in the lawsuit do not have standing because they are not public libraries. While they are open to the public, the Community Library, located in Ketchum, and the Collister United Methodist Church library, in Boise, do not receive public funds and are not subject to the law. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Bill to make firing squad main method of execution in Idaho moves to Senate floor

Yahoo

20-02-2025

Politics
Yahoo

Bill to make firing squad main method of execution in Idaho moves to Senate floor

Sen. Doug Ricks, R-Rexburg, works from the floor of the Idaho Senate on April 10, 2024. (Kyle Pfannenstiel/Idaho Capital Sun) A bill to make death by firing squad the main method of execution in Idaho is moving to the Senate floor for a vote after passing the Senate Judiciary and Rules Committee on Wednesday afternoon. If House Bill 37 is passed into law, Idaho could become the only state in the U.S. to have death by firing squad as the primary death penalty method. Nine people are on death row in Idaho, and lethal injection is the primary way to execute them, according to Idaho law. However, discussions about the use of firing squads have become more common in recent years. In 2023, Idaho implemented a law to allow firing squads as an execution method when lethal injection is unavailable. And in February 2024, Idaho attempted to execute 74-year-old Thomas Creech by lethal injection, but the execution attempt failed after the execution team was unable to locate a vein for an IV to inject him with the chemicals. Sen. Doug Ricks, R-Rexburg, said the bill would address challenges that occurred during Creech's execution attempt and resolve the issue of finding lethal chemicals. The bill's cosponsor, Rep. Bruce Skaug, R-Nampa, also said on the House floor he believes death by firing squad is a more humane execution method because it is 'quick' and 'certain.' The committee mostly voted along party lines to advance the bill, with both Democrats, Sen. Melissa Wintrow, D-Boise, and Sen. James Ruchti, D-Pocatello, voting against its advance. Ruchti said he believes the bill could lead to more lawsuits, since there is not enough data that shows executions by firing squad wouldn't be botched. Sen. Dan Foreman, R-Viola, was the only Republican on the committee to oppose the bill. 'It's cruel, and it's inhumane,' Foreman told the committee. 'I think quite frankly it's beneath the dignity of the state of Idaho. I say that with no animosity directed at anybody, but since I'm sitting here I have an obligation to tell you how I feel on any given bill.' Only five states — Idaho, Utah, South Carolina, Oklahoma and Mississippi — allow firing squads for executions. But the firing squad isn't the primary death penalty method in any of those states, a spokesperson for the Death Penalty Information Center previously told the Idaho Capital Sun. Excluding military executions, 144 people have been executed by firing squads in the entire history of the United States, according to a 2016 law review article. Only three of those firing squad executions have taken place since 1976 — all in Utah — according to the Death Penalty Information Center. LaMont Anderson, the lead deputy attorney general for the Idaho Attorney General's Office capital litigation unit, told the committee there are advantages to the firing squad method. 'Number one is less litigation,' Anderson said. 'There won't be litigation regarding whether bullets trigger a medical condition that is unique to a death sentenced murderer. There will be less litigation regarding the protocol. We won't have to search for execution drugs. (We) won't have to search for veins. We won't need a licensed medical doctor to insert an IV. There won't be botched executions.' Diana David, the Idaho chapter leader of Survivors Empowered and a survivor of gun violence, testified in opposition to the bill. 'I've heard this is the most humane way to execute someone, but I beg to differ,' she told the committee. 'No one is thinking of the journalists, the witnesses, the family, the staff, the cleanup crew. That's bothersome to me. There are people who will relive what they saw for the rest of their lives.' Idaho Department of Correction spokesperson Sanda Kuzeta-Cerimagic previously said the agency is considering using 'a remote-operated weapons system alongside traditional firing squad methods,' but the agency had not finalized its policies and procedures, the Idaho Capital Sun reported. The bill's fiscal note says it would have no fiscal impact. However, Skaug said more funds will be needed to develop the firing squad facility, which would come from funds already within the Department of Correction budget and would not involve another legislative budget request. The Idaho House widely approved the bill on a 58-11 vote earlier this month. The bill now heads to the Idaho Senate for a vote. To become law, bills must pass the Idaho House and Senate and avoid the governor's veto. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Latest news with #KylePfannenstiel

Federal judge extends block on Idaho gender-affirming care ban in prisons

Idaho Supreme Court hears arguments in abortion ballot initiative lawsuit

Federal court rejects longer block on Idaho's transgender bathroom restriction law

Judge denies coalition's request to temporarily block Idaho's library law

Bill to make firing squad main method of execution in Idaho moves to Senate floor

Get Started Now: Download the App