June 27, 2025 (Cover Photo Credit: Karyn Simmons)

Dear Friends,

Brian and Julie Wuoti wanted to open their home to children in foster care. They had the space, the love, and the commitment to help kids who needed families. The state of Vermont stepped in and told them no.

Why? Because the Wuotis refused to pledge they would affirm and promote any foster child’s chosen sexual orientation and gender identity, regardless of their deeply held religious beliefs. Vermont’s “Policy 76” requires all prospective foster parents to make this pledge or forfeit their ability to serve vulnerable children.

When loving couples like the Wuotis and another family, the Gantts, refused to abandon their faith, Vermont denied them foster licenses entirely. Think about that for a moment. Vermont would rather leave children without families than allow people of faith to provide loving homes.

This isn’t just misguided policy. It’s a fundamental violation of the First Amendment that puts ideology ahead of children’s welfare.

That’s why my office joined a 22-state coalition challenging Vermont’s unconstitutional foster care policy. Foster parents shouldn’t be forced to choose between their faith and serving children in need.

You might wonder why Idaho is getting involved in what’s happening in another state. The reason is that attacks on religious liberty and constitutional rights don’t stay contained to one state forever. Vermont’s policy is already being watched by activist officials across the country who want to copy it. If we don’t push back now, Idaho families of faith could face the same discrimination when they try to help children in foster care. We’re not waiting for that fight to come to our doorstep. My office joined this case by filing what’s called an amicus brief—which is Latin for “friend of the court.” It allows states like Idaho to weigh in on important cases even when we’re not directly involved, especially when the outcome could affect our own laws and citizens. When 22 state attorneys general file one together, it sends a strong message to the court that this isn’t just Vermont’s problem—it’s a threat to constitutional rights everywhere.

Idaho has shown there’s a better way to help foster kids. Rather than imposing one-size-fits-all requirements that drive away faith-motivated families, we use targeted matching programs that place children with compatible families while protecting everyone’s constitutional rights. Our approach first licenses safe, stable homes through standard safety evaluations, then carefully matches children with families sharing similar values and backgrounds.

Idaho law prioritizes placing children with foster parents of the same religious faith or tradition and explicitly protects foster parents from discrimination based on their sincere religious beliefs. The results speak for themselves. We’ve increased our foster home-to-child ratio from 0.75 to 0.9, successfully ended a temporary housing program for youth in foster care, and achieved placement stability where fewer than sixteen percent of foster children experience multiple placements.

Vermont’s approach is not only constitutionally deficient but also counterproductive. It prevents faith-motivated families from serving children while also denying religious foster children the opportunity to be placed in homes that share their values. When government forces people to abandon their deeply held beliefs as a condition of public service, it violates the very foundation of religious liberty.

This case matters far beyond Vermont’s borders. If states can condition foster care licensing on abandoning religious beliefs, what’s next? Will they require adoption agencies to violate their faith? Will they demand that religious schools teach content that contradicts their core beliefs? The precedent Vermont seeks to establish threatens religious liberty nationwide, and we must be proactive to stop it.

I will continue standing with people of faith and for the constitutional rights of all Idahoans. We’ve proven that protecting those rights and serving children’s best interests aren’t competing goals; they’re complementary ones. Idaho families know that children thrive when they’re placed with families who share their values and can provide not just homes, but hope rooted in faith and love.

Best regards,