By Darrell Kerby
In a state that prides itself on independence, local governance, and community traditions, Idaho’s legislature has taken an alarming and hypocritical turn.
House Bill 96, restricting local governments from flying any flag beyond the U.S. and state flags, is an act of political overreach disguised as neutrality.
The irony is glaring—the same lawmakers who decry government intrusion are now inserting themselves into decisions that historically belong to local communities and their elected representatives.
This is not about preserving Idaho’s values; it’s about erasing them. For generations, Idaho towns and cities have used flags to honor their histories, celebrate their values, and recognize diverse voices within their communities. Whether it’s flying a Pride flag during June, a tribal flag to honor Native heritage, or even a flag recognizing veterans beyond the standard military banners, these choices have always been left to the citizens and their local leaders.
The state legislature’s intervention in this longstanding tradition reeks of the very “wokeness” it claims to oppose—an imposition of ideological control under the guise of preserving neutrality.
Idaho’s strength has always been its decentralized governance, allowing cities and counties to shape their own identities. This bill contradicts that foundation, inserting top-down control where none is needed.
The claim that uniform flag restrictions “remove political influence” is disingenuous—it merely replaces one set of political values with another. Lawmakers who rail against big government mandates seem more than willing to impose their own when it suits their agenda. More importantly, this move diminishes free expression.
If a city wants to fly a flag that reflects its community values, what compelling state interest justifies preventing that action? The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech and expression, and flags are a recognized symbol of that principle. Whether local leaders wish to commemorate a movement, honor a heritage, or simply reflect the diversity of their residents, it is not for the state legislature to decide.
The most glaring issue, however, is the hypocrisy. Idaho lawmakers have positioned themselves as defenders of liberty, opposing federal overreach and embracing local decision-making—yet with this bill, they have done the very thing they claim to fight against. If “wokeness” is defined as government intervention to enforce ideological purity, then this legislation is its own form of wokeness, imposing rigid conformity on towns and cities that simply want to celebrate their own traditions.
For a state that values freedom, local identity, and the ability of communities to self-govern, this bill is an affront. It is a misguided attempt to police culture, a solution in search of a problem, and a gross overstep into matters best left to the people who actually live in these communities. Idahoans don’t need bureaucrats in Boise dictating what their towns can and cannot celebrate. They need leaders who respect local decision-making—not ones who fear it.
Excellent commentary! Those legislatorsa who voted for this bill should be ashamed of themselves for all the reasons you cite, plus being narrow-minded and petty.
Thank you, Darrell. I may not reside within the county at this point in my life, but I still have dear friends and family whom I hope to see live their lives quite fully and with peace in knowing their representatives genuinely care about them as individuals and as a community.