The Foundation for Moral Law, an Alabama-based nonprofit organization dedicated to the strict interpretation of the Constitution as intended by its Framers and to the defense of traditional family values, filed an amicus brief on December 25th with the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in the case of Roe v. Critchfield, supporting an Idaho statute that protects Idaho children by requiring that public schools maintain separate showers, locker rooms, bathrooms, and similar intimate spaces by sex. Read the brief here.

Plaintiff Roe challenged the law as a violation of the rights of transgender students. When she was unsuccessful in the federal district court, she appealed to the Ninth Circuit.

The Foundation argued that the Idaho law is necessary to protect the right and need of public-school children to have sexual privacy. In order to refute the Plaintiff’s legal claims, the Foundation traced the history of sexual privacy in bathrooms and other facilities. Beginning with the Biblical account of Noah and his sons in Genesis 9:20-27 and the Biblical admonitions throughout Scripture, the Foundation argued that public nudity is, in most circumstances, considered shameful, especially in the presence of the opposite sex. The Foundation also established that separate restroom and bathing facilities for men and women was the norm in the ancient world, during the Middle Ages, in colonial times, and throughout American history. Therefore, any claimed right to use restrooms designated for the opposite sex cannot be considered “deeply rooted in our history and tradition” and is therefore not entitled to constitutional protection.

Foundation Attorney Katrinnah Darden, primary author of the brief, explained that “The State of Idaho has a duty to protect its citizens, especially its children while they are in the care and custody of the public schools. We are therefore optimistic that the Ninth Circuit will uphold this law as a legitimate exercise of Idaho’s police power.”

Foundation Senior Counsel John Eidsmoe added, “I don’t believe a brief has ever been presented to a court that details and documents the history of sexual privacy as our brief does. The Foundation has made a remarkable contribution to legal scholarship and to the sound resolution of this case.”