H795 and H796 propose changes to H710 — the Children’s and Library Protection Act — that would further restrict access to materials in public schools and libraries. While the bills are framed as protecting minors, they raise serious concerns regarding overreach, censorship, and unintended impacts on education, intellectual freedom, and community trust. 

Key Concerns:

• Threat to intellectual freedom and access to educational materials 

These bills give the state broad authority to prohibit materials containing depictions or descriptions of sexual conduct or nudity, even in an educational context. By codifying sweeping restrictions and civil penalties, the bills risk limiting access to medically accurate sex education, literature addressing human relationships, and resources that support students’ understanding of history, health, and diversity. Students may be denied access to important information that promotes critical thinking and safe, informed decision-making.

• Enforcement mechanism invites private lawsuits and civil penalties 

The bills maintain enforcement via private parties, county prosecutors, and the Attorney General. This creates a chilling effect - schools and libraries may over-censor materials to avoid potential lawsuits or penalties, even when the content is age-appropriate or educational. The fear of litigation could undermine local control and professional judgment by educators and librarians.

• Undermines local control and community input 

Public schools and libraries are accountable to their local communities. These bills shift decision-making from trained educators, librarians, and school boards to a rigid statewide standard. This reduces the ability of local districts to select materials that reflect the needs, values, and maturity of their students. Local communities, parents, and educators are better positioned to determine age-appropriate content than state-mandated restrictions.

• Raises First Amendment and constitutional concerns 

While the state can exercise its own “government speech” in selecting curricula and library materials, imposing overly broad prohibitions that censor entire categories of content risks infringing on students’ First Amendment rights. Courts have consistently cautioned against overbroad restrictions that deny minors access to constitutionally protected speech, particularly in educational settings. These bills will continue to expose Idaho to legal challenges and erode students’ free expression rights.

• Potential educational harm 

Students rely on schools and libraries to provide access to varying perspectives, accurate health information, and literature that reflects real-world experiences. Restricting materials indiscriminately can:

• Limit students’ understanding of human development, health, and sexuality

• Reduce exposure to cultural, historical, and social viewpoints

• Hinder literacy and critical thinking skills 

Overbroad censorship harms educational outcomes rather than protecting children. 

H795 and H796 replace professional, age-appropriate judgment with rigid, legally enforced restrictions. They risk chilling access to educational and library materials, undermine local control, and could violate First Amendment principles. Protecting children does not require overreach that diminishes intellectual freedom or educational quality. 

How H795 and H796 Could Impact the H710 Lawsuit 

H710, the Children’s and Library Protection Act, is currently being challenged in court over concerns that it may violate the First Amendment by restricting access to certain materials in public schools and libraries. H795 and H796 propose changes that would maintain or expand these restrictions. Why this matters:

1. Will complicate the lawsuit – If these bills pass while H710 is being litigated, courts may need to consider the new versions of the law. This could delay resolution and create additional legal questions about whether the changes address or worsen constitutional concerns.

2. Frames the law as “government speech” – The bills explicitly say the state can choose materials for public schools and libraries as their right to “Government Speech”. Does the Government have this First Amendment right, and does it always override the people/parents’ rights? Courts will need to evaluate whether this framing justifies restricting minors’ access, which could influence the outcome.

3. Maintains enforcement risks for schools and libraries – Keeping civil penalties and private enforcement creates continued fear of liability. This could lead to over-censorship, which plaintiffs may cite as evidence of harm. 

H795 and H796 will make the case regarding H710 more complex, extend litigation, and create more uncertainty for educators, librarians, and students about what materials are allowed.