Law / United States / 
Idaho
Genetic Testing Privacy Act, restrictions on employers
A citation is an address, not a summary. The first part names the law; what follows narrows it to the exact section, article or paragraph.
What follows is LexLint's own research summary of this law, not legal advice.
Commencement not set.
A sensitive categories rule binding public and private bodies.
As of 28 August 2026.
What it requires
- Do not access, request, or require an individual's private genetic information, or require a genetic test, as a condition of a hiring, promotion, retention, or other related employment decision in Idaho if you employ five or more persons.
- Treat a government employer the same as a private employer under this Act; the definition of employer expressly includes government.
What this law does
Drafted with AI from the cited sources under the direction of UnGovr staff. UnGovr holds editorial responsibility for this page.
Idaho's Genetic Testing Privacy Act (Idaho Code Title 39, Chapter 83) is an employment-context genetic-privacy statute rather than a general-audience personal-data regime.
Section 39-8303 bars an "employer", defined at sec. 39-8302(4) to include any entity employing five or more persons and expressly including government, from accessing or considering an individual's private genetic information, requesting or requiring consent to release it, requesting or requiring a genetic test of an individual or blood relative, or inquiring whether either has taken or refused one, in connection with a hiring, promotion, retention, or other related employment decision.
Narrow exceptions allow a court-ordered compelled disclosure in limited circumstances and forensic or human-remains DNA analysis by an employer that conducts it. The Act creates no controller or processor duties and no consumer-facing right against a business generally.
When LexLint raises it
high_risk_decisions
Read the law
official Idaho statute text, Idaho Code Title 39, Chapter 83, Idaho Legislature
Every line above is drawn from the primary source linked here, read on the date shown. This is a research summary, not legal advice.