BOISE — The Senate’s Judiciary and Rules Committee voted to introduce legislation seeking to bar religious and cultural law from factoring into court decisions and revise the state’s “Son of Sam” law to prevent profiting from criminal acts.

The first piece of legislation heard by the committee, deemed the “Constitutional Courts Act,” was introduced by Sen. Dan Foreman on Monday and seeks to reassert that Idaho courts remain beholden to the U.S. Constitution and the constitution of the state of Idaho.

Foreman, R-Moscow, asserted that the legislation “does not intend to discriminate against anybody” and instead intends to guard against a future turning away from the Constitution as the law of the land. Specific examples were not provided by Foreman of this happening in Idaho.

A key sticking point in the bill’s language for Sen. James Ruchti, D-Pocatello, was the phrasing that state courts cannot incorporate cultural or religious law when such laws do “not fully support and conform with the rights of citizens” as defined in both federal and state constitutions.

Ruchti questioned whether this language left the door open for the laws of Christianity to be held above other religious laws when they come to be considered within Idaho’s courts.

Foreman said that this was intended merely to restate the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

“It’s a reiteration of the fact that we have a justice system here that’s based on our body of laws and we bring … that body of laws to life every day in our courts and we don’t want to replace that,” Foreman said. “We aren’t saying it couldn’t be better … but it will be done so in degree, not wholesale change.”

The second bill heard by the committee came from Sen. Tammy Nichols, R-Middleton, and seeks to implement a new “Son of Sam” law, updating existing legislation that has been in place in Idaho since 1978. Statutes bearing this name were initially passed across dozens of states following the Son of Sam murders in the late 1970s to redirect profits criminals earn from the coverage of their crimes to their victims.

Nichols said her bill intends to both modernize Idaho statute and respond to recent “high-profile” crimes in the state that have drawn national attention. Though not referencing particular crimes in her legislation, the 2022 killings at the University of Idaho and the 2025 ambush of firefighters in Coeur d’Alene were two that have recently drawn national media headlines.

In her presentation of the bill, Nichols noted many of the state Son of Sam statutes have since been struck down on grounds that they violate the First Amendment and while Idaho’s current law on criminals reaping profit remains in place, Nichols said there remains “constitutional risks in Idaho’s statute.”

To address this concern, the legislation makes explicit that the bill does not apply to the content of expression — only to the revenue derived from a crime’s publicity.

Beyond adequate constitutional protections, Nichols said Idaho’s current law lacks protections against ongoing royalties, streaming content and new forms of digital monetization that the bill seeks to address.

The legislation as written would mean anyone who pays an offender for an appearance or otherwise “exploits the notoriety of a crime” is required to send the payment to the Idaho State Treasurer, who will hold the payment in an escrow account. Victims of crimes can then file claims for these funds during the escrow period which lasts for a five years unless extended by court order.

The limited exceptions for to payment to criminal perpetrators are as follows:

Payments for legal services

Works of art or fiction that briefly mention the crime

Regular wages or income not related to the crime

Money earned before the crime was committed

News or documentary works created “mainly to inform or educate” with an offender paid “only normal interview fees”

Both bills were “sent to print” out of committee and will be due for a public hearing at a later date.