Bill Description: Senate Bill 1179 would clarify and expand the exemption provision related to testing and medical procedures required for newborns.

Rating: +1

NOTE: Senate Bill 1179 is a trailer bill to Senate Bill 1014 (2025), which was passed and signed into law earlier this year.

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?

Senate Bill 1179 would amend Section 39-912, Idaho Code, as amended in Section 13 of Senate Bill 1014 (2025), to clarify and expand the exemption provision related to testing and medical procedures required for newborns.

Under the language adopted in Senate Bill 1014, the requirements would not apply "to any child whose parent or guardian: objects thereto on the grounds that it conflicts with the tenets or practices of a recognized church or religious denomination of which said parent or guardian is an adherent or member."

Senate Bill 1179 would amend this language to apply to a parent or guardian who "objects on religious or other grounds, including philosophical or conscientious beliefs; or submits a certificate signed by a physician licensed by the state board of medicine stating that the physical condition of the child is such that all or any of the requirements of this chapter would endanger the life or health of the child."

In our analysis of Senate Bill 1014, we pointed out that one of the testing and medical procedures required in this code involves applying ocular antibiotic prophylaxis (a germicide) to the eyes of a newborn. This is considered a "safe and effective" preventative treatment, yet it is only needed for babies born to women with gonorrhea.

Some parents know they don't have any conditions presenting this risk and would choose to decline this treatment accordingly. Yet the exemption provision in Senate Bill 1014 only protects this decision if it is asserted on religious — rather than scientific and factual — grounds.

Fundamentally, requiring medical procedures is not the proper role of government and creating statutory mandates paired with exemptions is a strange workaround that could be better accomplished by simply removing the mandates.

Nevertheless, Senate Bill 1179 would clarify that parents and guardians may opt out for "philosophical or conscientious" reasons in addition to just religious reasons, which is an improvement.

(+1)