Bill Description: House Bill 141 grants sole responsibility for Title IX compliance to the president of each public institution of higher education in the state of Idaho.

Rating: 0 

Does it in any way restrict public access to information related to government activity or otherwise compromise government transparency, accountability, or election integrity? Conversely, does it increase public access to information related to government activity or increase government transparency, accountability, or election integrity?

House Bill 141 establishes that “the president of each institution of higher education in Idaho shall have the exclusive authority and duty to implement all title IX compliance.” It is a principle of good government that the authority to execute the laws is best entrusted to a singular individual whenever possible. As observed by Hamilton in Federalist 70, when such authority is divided amongst several officers it “tends to conceal faults and destroy responsibility.” In line with this principle, HB 141 improves government accountability by identifying a singular officer in every college and university who is responsible for compliance with Title IX.

Moreover, the bill will improve transparency by requiring the president of each institution to provide a report to the state board of education and legislature that includes:

1. “The number of title IX complaints received during the previous academic year. The report shall also include the number of investigations conducted and a description of the outcomes of all investigations;
2. Copies of all title IX-related policies and procedures of the institution of higher education, which shall conspicuously highlight any changes made to such policies and procedures during the previous year;
3. A summary of interim measures taken to protect complainants and the accused during the time an investigation is pending; and
4. A summary of all corrective actions taken to address failures in title IX compliance.”

(+1)

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?

While the initial intentions behind Title IX were commendable, it has since become a favorite tool of the radical Left to implement their political agenda and threaten students’ civil liberties. For instance, just last year the Attorney General of Idaho filed suit against the Biden administration for implementing new interpretive rules regarding Title IX that would have eroded the due process rights of students and forced gender ideology onto Idaho’s public institutions of education. 

House Bill 141 declares that the presidents of Idaho’s public institutions of higher education have the “duty to implement all title IX compliance” without regard for the constitutionality of such regulations. Conceivably, this directive would have required Idaho’s colleges and universities to comply with the Biden administration’s Title IX rules despite Idaho’s Attorney General concluding that they were unlawful. Therefore, this bill could give college and university presidents legal cover to prioritize compliance with the arbitrary decrees of the administrative state over fidelity to the Constitution. 

(-1)