Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 73-401 (2026)
Definitions.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Definitions.
As used in this chapter unless the context otherwise requires:
(1) "Demonstrates" means meets the burdens of going forward with evidence, and persuasion under the standard of clear and convincing evidence.
(2) "Exercise of religion" means the ability to act or refusal to act in a manner substantially motivated by a religious belief, whether or not the exercise is compulsory or central to a larger system of religious belief.
(3) "Government" includes this state and any agency or political subdivision of this state.
(4) "Political subdivision" includes any county, city, school district, taxing district, municipal corporation, or agency of a county, city, school district, or municipal corporation.
(5) "Substantially burden" means to inhibit or curtail religiously motivated practices.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18
cases (8 in the last 5 years), 2003–2026 · leading case: State v. White, 271 P.3d 1217 (Idaho Ct. App. 2011).
State v. White, 271 P.3d 1217 (Idaho Ct. App. 2011). “*363 Specifically, he contends the district court erred in affirming the magistrate’s rejection of his argument that his right to religious freedom under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article 1, § 4 of the Idaho Constitution, and the Idaho Free Exercise…”
Combs v. Homer-Ctr. Sch. Dist., 540 F.3d 231 (3rd Cir. 2008). “§§ 57-1 to 57-2.02; Utah Code Ann. §§ 63L-5-101 to 63L-5-403; see also Ala.”
State v. Levon F. Cordingley - Poss, 302 P.3d 730 (Idaho Ct. App. 2013). “Levon Fred Cordingley appeals from the district court’s intermediate appellate decision affirming the magistrate’s denial of his motion to dismiss the possession of marijuana and paraphernalia charges against him on the basis his right to religious freedom under the Idaho Free…”
Roles v. Townsend, 64 P.3d 338 (Idaho Ct. App. 2003). “Idaho’s Free Exercise of Religion Act, Idaho Code §§ 73-401 , et seq., became effective on February 1, 2001.”
Hyde v. Fisher, 203 P.3d 712 (Idaho Ct. App. 2009). “; and the Free Exercise of Religion Protected Act (FERPA), Idaho Code § 73-401 , et. seq. Specifically, Hyde alleges constitutional and statutory violations of his right to exercise the Native American religion by way of the sweat lodge, ceremonial pipe, smudging, and possession…”
Hyde v. Fisher, 152 P.3d 653 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007). “; and the Free Exercise of Religion Protected Act (FERPA), Idaho Code § 73-401 , et seq. Specifically, Hyde alleges constitutional and statutory violations of his right to exercise the Native American religion by way of the sweat lodge, ceremonial pipe, smudging, and possession…”
Lewis v. State, Dept. of Transp., 146 P.3d 684 (Idaho Ct. App. 2006). “§ 73-402(3), is defined in I.C. § 73-401 as: “meets the burdens of going forward with evidence, and persuasion under the standard of clear and convincing evidence.”
State v. Heath, 485 P.3d 1121 (Idaho 2021). “In addition to his constitutional arguments, Heath contends that the prohibition of marijuana under the CSA violates the Free Exercise of Religion Protected Act, Idaho Code section 73-401, et seq. (“FERPA”). FERPA protects religious liberty beyond the constitutional baseline by…”
Ricks v. State of Idaho Contractors Bd., 435 P.3d 1 (Idaho Ct. App. 2018). “FERPA provides a wider scope of protection for religious liberty than RFRA, "adopting a much broader definition of 'substantially burdens,' " as well as codifying the phrase "exercise of religion" to mean "the ability to act or refusal to act in a manner substantially motivated…”
State v. Levon F. Cordingley - Poss (Idaho Ct. App. 2013). “__________________________________ GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge Levon Fred Cordingley appeals from the district court’s intermediate appellate decision affirming the magistrate’s denial of his motion to dismiss the possession of marijuana and paraphernalia charges against him on the…”
Ricks v. State of Idaho Contractors Bd. (Idaho Ct. App. 2018). “FERPA states that “‘Substantially burden’ means to inhibit or curtail religiously motivated practices,” I.C. § 73-401, and that “the term ‘substantially burden’ is intended solely to ensure that [FERPA] is not triggered by trivial, technical or de minimis infractions,” I.”
State v. Heath (Idaho 2021). “In addition to his constitutional arguments, Heath contends that the prohibition of marijuana under the CSA violates the Free Exercise of Religion Protected Act, Idaho Code section 73-401, et seq. (“FERPA”). FERPA protects religious liberty beyond the constitutional baseline by…”
— Idaho Code § 73-401(2) — 3 cases
State v. Levon F. Cordingley - Poss, 302 P.3d 730 (Idaho Ct. App. 2013). “Levon Fred Cordingley appeals from the district court’s intermediate appellate decision affirming the magistrate’s denial of his motion to dismiss the possession of marijuana and paraphernalia charges against him on the basis his right to religious freedom under the Idaho Free…”
State v. White, 271 P.3d 1217 (Idaho Ct. App. 2011). “*363 Specifically, he contends the district court erred in affirming the magistrate’s rejection of his argument that his right to religious freedom under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article 1, § 4 of the Idaho Constitution, and the Idaho Free Exercise…”
State v. Levon F. Cordingley - Poss (Idaho Ct. App. 2013). “__________________________________ GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge Levon Fred Cordingley appeals from the district court’s intermediate appellate decision affirming the magistrate’s denial of his motion to dismiss the possession of marijuana and paraphernalia charges against him on the…”
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.