Full Breakdown
Idaho Federal Judge Blocks Enforcement of Transgender Bathroom Law
6/17/2026, 2:04:11 AM
Preliminary Injunction Halts H.B. 752
On May 2026, a U.S. District Court judge in Idaho issued a preliminary injunction halting enforcement of House Bill 752 (H.B. 752). The law, signed by Governor Brad Little, would have made using a restroom that did not match a person’s sex at birth a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in prison for a first offense and a felony punishable by up to five years for a second offense. The injunction maintains restroom access for transgender individuals as the lawsuit proceeds.
Legislative Background and Legal Challenge
H.B. 752 was enacted to apply to government-owned facilities and private businesses open to the public, including libraries, malls, gas stations, restaurants, hospitals and entertainment venues, and was slated to take effect on July 1, 2026. In April 2026, six transgender Idaho residents filed a federal suit alleging violations of due-process, equal-protection and privacy rights. Plaintiffs are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Idaho, Lambda Legal, Munger, Tolles & Olson and Alturas Law Group.
Timeline of Key Developments
- Early 2026 – Governor Brad Little signs H.B. 752.
- April 2026 – Six transgender residents file the federal lawsuit.
- May 2026 – Preliminary injunction issued, halting enforcement.
- July 1 2026 – Original effective date of the law, now delayed.
Data on Restroom Policies
A UCLA analysis of public-safety data cited in the court filing found that inclusive restroom policies have no measurable effect on harassment or violence rates, whereas restrictive policies increase the already heightened risk of harassment and violence faced by transgender people.
Legal and Practical Implications
The injunction underscores a clash between state-level gender-based restroom regulations and constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection. It also highlights enforcement challenges raised by law-enforcement groups, who argue that verifying a person’s sex at birth in public settings lacks a clear, non-invasive method.
Official Positions
The Idaho Fraternal Order of Police and the Idaho Chiefs of Police Association publicly opposed H.B. 752, noting the lack of a reasonable means to verify sex at birth without invasive questioning. The ACLU of Idaho contended that the statute infringes on due-process and privacy protections guaranteed by the Constitution.
Opposition from Law-Enforcement
Law-enforcement groups argue that the law would place officers in untenable positions during routine contacts, requiring invasive verification of sex that lacks clear standards.
Gaps in the Record
The court filings do not include empirical data on how authorities would enforce the verification requirement, and the Idaho state government has not issued a direct response to the injunction.
> “There is no ‘clear or reasonable way’ to determine a person’s sex at birth during a field contact without ‘invasive and inappropriate’ questioning or searches.” — Idaho Fraternal Order of Police and Idaho Chiefs of Police Association
Next Steps
The plaintiffs intend to pursue a permanent injunction and a declaration that H.B. 752 is unconstitutional. The state may appeal the preliminary order, and additional hearings are slated for later in 2026.
