Bill description: Under HB 443, employers or companies that contract with the state of Idaho shall not discriminate against unvaccinated persons.

Rating: +1

Does it violate the principle of equal protection under the law? Examples include laws which discriminate or differentiate based on age, gender, or religion or which apply laws, regulations, rules, or penalties differently based on such characteristics. Conversely, does it restore or protect the principle of equal protection under the law?

HB 443 says, "The state of Idaho and any political subdivision in the state shall not enter into a contract with an employer or company that discriminates against persons on the basis of their vaccination records or vaccination status."

HB 443 also clarifies that "No employer or company, having entered into a contract with the state or any political subdivision in the state, shall discharge without just cause, refuse to hire, or otherwise discriminate against any person with respect to hire, tenure, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, or any matter directly or indirectly related to employment, on the basis that the person has not been or will not be vaccinated against any illness or disease because of a medical contraindication or for reasons of conscience, including religious or philosophical beliefs."

The provisions of HB 443 do not infringe on the rights of businesses or private property owners. They simply clarify that the state will not do business with companies that do not respect the religious and philosophical beliefs of their employees.

(+1)