Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 67-5901 (2026)
Purpose of chapter.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Purpose of chapter.
The general purposes of this chapter are:
(1) To provide for execution within the state of the policies embodied in the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, and Titles I and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
(2) To secure for all individuals within the state freedom from discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin or disability in connection with employment, public accommodations, and real property transactions, discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin in connection with education, discrimination because of age in connection with employment, and thereby to protect their interest in personal dignity, to make available to the state their full productive capacities, to secure the state against domestic strife and unrest, to preserve the public safety, health, and general welfare, and to promote the interests, rights and privileges of individuals within the state.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 64
cases (25 in the last 5 years), 1973–2026 · leading case: MacKay v. Four Rivers Packing Co., 179 P.3d 1064 (Idaho 2008).
MacKay v. Four Rivers Packing Co., 179 P.3d 1064 (Idaho 2008). “Mackay claims he presented specific evidence showing Four Rivers regarded him as having a disability that substantially limited his ability to perform his job, and terminated him based on that belief. Mackay does not dispute that he was fully capable of performing the essential…”
O'DELL v. Basabe, 810 P.2d 1082 (Idaho 1991). “We are guided in our interpretation of the Idaho statute by federal law.”
Foster v. Shore Club Lodge, Inc., 908 P.2d 1228 (Idaho 1995). “The issue here is the same as that discussed in part III above: whether the word “employer” should be construed to allow individual Habüity against agents or employees who allegedly committed the wrongful acts.”
Stout v. Key Training Corp., 158 P.3d 971 (Idaho 2007). “NOTES [1] Idaho Code § 67-5901 states: The general purposes of this chapter are: (1)[t]o provide for execution within the state of the policies embodied in the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, and…”
Frogley v. Meridian Jt. Sch. Dist. No. 2, 314 P.3d 613 (Idaho 2013). “The Idaho Human Rights Act, I.C. § 67-5901 et seq., provides for the execution of the federal Civil Rights Act within the State of Idaho.”
Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents, 528 U.S. 62 (2000). “1998); Idaho Code § 67-5901 et seq. (1995 and Supp.”
Ostrander v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. of Idaho, Inc., 851 P.2d 946 (Idaho 1993). “§ 623 (ADEA), and the Idaho Human Rights Act, I.C. §§ 67-5901 to -5912. Here she states that the Court should provide a remedy in tort to assure the effectiveness of these provisions.”
Patterson v. State, Dep't of Health & Welfare, 256 P.3d 718 (Idaho 2011). “Factual and Procedural History This is a constructive discharge case arising under the Idaho Human Rights Act (IHRA), I.C. § 67-5901 et seq., and the Idaho Protection of Public Employees Act (IP-PEA), I.”
Charles R. Pottenger v. Potlatch Corp., a Delaware Corp., 329 F.3d 740 (9th Cir. 2003). “, and the Idaho Human Rights Act, Idaho Code §§ 67-5901 et seq. Pottenger also claims intentional infliction of emotional distress and defamation under Idaho law.”
Idaho Comm'n on Human Rights v. Campbell, 506 P.2d 112 (Idaho 1973). “NOTES [1] I.C. § 67-5901. "The general purposes of this act are (1) * * * (2) To secure for all individuals within the state freedom from discrimination because of race, color, religion or national origin in connection with employment, public accommodations, education and real…”
Bowles v. Keating, 606 P.2d 458 (Idaho 1979). “This serves to relieve our district courts of the burden of forging new law in this delicate area, and also appears to further the legislative intention as expressed in I.C. § 67-5901: "The general purposes of this act are: (1) To provide for execution with the state of the…”
Bryant v. City of Blackfoot, 48 P.3d 636 (Idaho 2002). “In her complaint, she expressly stated that her third and fourth claims for relief, which were the claims alleging discriminatory conduct, were based upon federal law.”
— Idaho Code § 67-5901(1) — 6 cases
Ostrander v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. of Idaho, Inc., 851 P.2d 946 (Idaho 1993). “§ 623 (ADEA), and the Idaho Human Rights Act, I.C. §§ 67-5901 to -5912. Here she states that the Court should provide a remedy in tort to assure the effectiveness of these provisions.”
Frogley v. Meridian Jt. Sch. Dist. No. 2, 314 P.3d 613 (Idaho 2013). “The Idaho Human Rights Act, I.C. § 67-5901 et seq., provides for the execution of the federal Civil Rights Act within the State of Idaho.”
Fowler v. Kootenai Cnty., 918 P.2d 1185 (Idaho 1996).
Foster v. Shore Club Lodge, Inc., 908 P.2d 1228 (Idaho 1995). “The issue here is the same as that discussed in part III above: whether the word “employer” should be construed to allow individual Habüity against agents or employees who allegedly committed the wrongful acts.”
Blasch v. HP, Inc. (Idaho 2024).
— Idaho Code § 67-5901(2) — 2 cases
Paterson v. State, 915 P.2d 724 (Idaho 1996).
Idaho Comm'n on Human Rights v. Campbell, 506 P.2d 112 (Idaho 1973). “NOTES [1] I.C. § 67-5901. "The general purposes of this act are (1) * * * (2) To secure for all individuals within the state freedom from discrimination because of race, color, religion or national origin in connection with employment, public accommodations, education and real…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.