(You can watch our video on this topic here or below.)

Can HOAs ban firearms in common areas in Idaho? That question came up after an HOA in the Arvory Crest subdivision in Eagle, through its management company, emailed residents announcing a ban on firearms in all common areas. One homeowner shared the email with the Idaho Second Amendment Alliance.

So is what the HOA did illegal? This is our opinion, not legal advice.

Idaho’s firearm preemption statute, Idaho Code § 18‑3302J, does not apply to HOAs. Preemption limits what government entities, cities, counties, and agencies can do. It does not restrict private property owners or private corporations. An HOA is a private corporate entity, and the common areas it controls are private property. Unless the HOA has deeded its parks or amenities to the city (which is not the case here), preemption does not apply.

Whether the HOA followed its own CC&Rs is a separate issue. HOAs must follow their governing documents, and if the board or management company implemented a rule without proper authority or procedure, homeowners may have grounds to challenge it internally. Residents should review voting requirements, rule‑change procedures, and whether the CC&Rs allow bans on lawful firearm possession.

Some gun owners have asked about Idaho Code § 30‑501, which requires Idaho corporations to act consistent with the Idaho Constitution, including Article I, Section 11 (Idaho’s right‑to‑bear‑arms provision). This argument was raised in Herndon v. Sandpoint, ISAA’s lawsuit against the City of Sandpoint.

One of the attorneys involved confirmed that the Idaho Supreme Court simply ignored the § 30‑501 argument in its opinion, neither accepting nor rejecting it. Because the Court did not address it, the argument technically remains open, but realistically, Idaho’s Supreme Court has shown little willingness to expand gun‑rights protections beyond clear statutory or constitutional text. They are generally deferential to government and corporate interests, and ISAA does not expect them to side with gun owners on this theory.

Some people have referenced the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2026 decision in Wolford v. Lopez. It’s important to be precise about what Wolford actually held. Hawaii passed a law banning firearms on private property open to the public unless the owner gave express consent. The Supreme Court struck that law down, holding that states cannot impose a default rule banning carry on public‑facing private property; property owners must decide for themselves.

Wolford did not say HOAs must allow guns, nor did it say HOAs must ban guns. It simply reaffirmed that private property owners have the right to decide whether firearms are allowed on their property. An HOA, acting as a private corporate property owner, falls squarely within that category. Under Wolford, the HOA’s ban is almost certainly lawful under federal constitutional law.

The bigger issue is that Idaho is changing. While many Idahoans strongly support the Second Amendment, the state has seen an influx of residents who do not share those values. Anti‑gun policies increasingly appear in corporate policies, school districts, local governments, and HOAs. The Herndon v. Sandpoint case exposed a harsh reality: Idaho’s Supreme Court is not reliably pro‑Second Amendment, and often sides with government or corporate interests. Idaho will remain free only if Idahoans actively defend their rights.

Gun owners must expose anti‑gun policies wherever they appear, challenge HOA rules internally when they violate CC&Rs, run for HOA boards, elect legislators who will strengthen Idaho’s firearm preemption laws, and push for judicial reform so Idaho’s courts reflect Idaho values. Idaho is not the safe haven it once was, and it is up to us to ensure it does not become another California.

If someone has another legal theory we haven’t considered that might be relevant to this situation, we are happy to hear it out and see whether it is an avenue we can pursue.