Bill Description: House Bill 668 (H668) is a rerun of House Bill 524, which was introduced earlier in the session. The most notable changes in H668 compared to H524 are the addition of an affirmative defense provision, the removal of the requirement on law enforcement officers to make a report within four hours of a custody interference claim, and the removal of detailed provisions regarding compensatory parenting time.
Rating: +2
Does it directly or indirectly create or increase penalties for victimless crimes or non-restorative penalties for non-violent crimes? Conversely, does it eliminate or decrease penalties for victimless crimes or non-restorative penalties for non-violent crimes?
House Bill 668 establishes a graduated penalty structure that escalates custody interference from an infraction to a felony, with increasing fines and jail time for repeat offenses. Violations of custody orders and agreements are not victimless. Children and parents are both harmed when there is interference in lawful custody arrangements.
(0)
Does it violate the spirit or the letter of either the United States Constitution or the Idaho Constitution? Examples include restrictions on speech, public assembly, the press, privacy, private property, or firearms. Conversely, does it restore or uphold the protections guaranteed in the US Constitution or the Idaho Constitution?
Unlike House Bill 524, which expanded enforcement timelines and reporting requirements for law enforcement and the courts, House Bill 668 adds affirmative defenses and clarifies enforcement duties in custody interference cases. By codifying affirmative defense, the bill guards against excessive use of state power. Affirmative defenses are a form of constitutional restraint on government because they require courts to consider situational contexts and individual rights.
Additionally, H668 strengthens due process by ensuring a person accused of custody interference has clear legal grounds to justify actions taken under urgent or protective circumstances. This change helps protect parental rights, a principle consistently upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. The bill’s language pushes back against arbitrary enforcement, requiring that intrusion by the state be justified.
(+1)
Does it promote the breakdown of the traditional family or the deconstruction of societal norms? Examples include promoting or incentivizing degeneracy, violating parental rights, and compromising the innocence of children. Conversely, does it protect or uphold the structure, tenets, and traditional values of Western society?
The bill upholds the traditional family structure by discouraging unilateral denial of parenting time and ensuring that both parents’ court-recognized roles are honored. Custody disputes are among the most impactful on family life and thereby, society. H668 creates accountability for deliberate interference and offers protection for good-faith actions, which aligns with the philosophy that the state should protect families rather than hinder them. It also codifies the enforcement of existing court orders, thereby reinforcing stable family arrangements and predictability in parental rights enforcement.
(+1)
