February 21, 2026
The Stand Your Ground Shield Act
I believe deeply in personal responsibility, constitutional liberty, and the God-given right to defend your life and your family. I do not take lightly the authority we hold in the Legislature and I certainly do not take the power of the State lightly when it is brought against one of our own citizens.
Over the years, I have watched good people endure the crushing weight of prosecution not because they were criminals, but because they found themselves in a moment where they had to make a split-second decision to protect life. Even when they were ultimately vindicated, the cost financial, emotional, and reputational was staggering.
SB1298, the Idaho Stand Your Ground Shield Act, is about restoring balance. It is about ensuring that when an Idahoan acts within the law to defend their home, family, or themselves, the government does not become another threat they must survive.
Liberty is not theoretical. Due process is not symbolic. And justice should never depend on whether someone can afford to defend themselves.
This week, the Senate I introduced an important step toward restoring balance and fairness for Idahoans who lawfully defend themselves, their families, or their homes.
SB1298 reinforces a foundational Idaho principle:
When Idahoans act within the law to defend life and home, the law should stand with them not bankrupt them.
This is about preserving the State’s ability to prosecute real violence while ensuring that lawful self-defense doesn’t become a life sentence of debt, lost employment, and permanent reputational harm.
It is a bill about balance, fairness, and the practical meaning of “presumed innocent.”
If a law-abiding citizen acts within Idaho’s existing self-defense laws, they should not be financially ruined just because they were accused.
It is a problem when “the process becomes the punishment.”
Idaho has strong self-defense statutes. SB1298 does not expand when force may be used. The standards for justified force remain the same as they are in existing Idaho law.
The problem is procedural.
In many cases, self-defense can only be fully resolved at trial—after arrest, charges, attorney fees, months (or years) of court dates, reputational damage, and lost work. Even if someone is completely vindicated, the cost can be crushing.
This will also save taxpayer dollars by avoiding the state’s trial expenses.
That reality creates a system where the “best defense” is often available only to those with enough money to survive the process.
SB1298 creates a structured pretrial immunity hearing, allowing a judge to examine credible self-defense claims early, before families are destroyed by litigation.
Civil courts use summary judgment to decide cases without a trial when the facts are undisputed and the law is clear.
Idaho courts already recognize that once self-defense is properly raised, the burden is on the State to disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Idaho’s own pattern jury instruction says exactly that. (isc.idaho.gov)
SB1298 simply moves a meaningful evidentiary checkpoint earlier, so innocent Idahoans aren’t forced to “go broke to be found right.”
Reimbursement: making the innocent whole
SB1298 also addresses reimbursement of reasonable costs when a person is found not guilty on the grounds that their conduct was lawful self-defense.
That distinction matters. The goal is not to “reward” wrongdoing or technical acquittals; it is to recognize a basic fairness principle:
If the State prosecutes someone who is ultimately found to have acted lawfully under Idaho’s self-defense standards, Idaho should not leave that citizen financially wrecked for exercising a fundamental right.
Florida and Texas show the path
Florida has a statutory framework that expressly provides immunity from criminal prosecution and a pretrial hearing mechanism. Florida law also places a defined burden on the party attempting to overcome immunity at that hearing. (Online Sunshine)
That’s the type of clarity SB1298 will bring to Idaho. This clarity will protect lawful citizens and preserve the State’s ability to prosecute unlawful violence.
Texas law includes strong justification provisions for the use of deadly force in certain circumstances. Texas also provides civil immunity for the use of justified force. (Texas Statutes)
At its core, the goal is to maintain a strict self-defense standard while preventing law-abiding people from being destroyed by litigation when they acted lawfully.
A structured pretrial process could help courts and counsel test whether the case truly requires a full jury trial. Saving the defendant and the state money by avoiding a lengthy trial.
Trials are expensive for counties, courts, jurors, prosecutors, and public defense systems. Idaho has faced serious scrutiny over public defense capacity in the last decade. (American Civil Liberties Union)
SB1298 does not eliminate arrests based on probable cause. It simply ensures that after charges are filed, a citizen with a credible claim can request a structured, early hearing.
Idaho already uses judicial checks, such as probable cause hearings and grand juries. SB1298 recognizes a basic principle: If the State has a procedural pathway to establish probable cause, a defendant with a credible self-defense justification should have an early judicial review as well.
God bless,
Senator Christy Zito
District 8
