I am sure I about to incur wrath from some people for this but part of the logic by Idaho is sound-competing in sports vs. accommodations for bathrooms and job opportunities are different. Passing laws to prevent true discrimination vs. sports competitions need to be considered separately. Due to the muscular and testosterone difference from boy/girls or men/women, transgender competitions are not fair and this mostly has to do with boys/men competing against women. From a "muscle" measure, women are typically 50-60% as strong as men in the upper body and 60-70% as strong in the lower body. That alone qualifies as a mismatch. Men have to be chemically altered to meet the testosterone levels deemed by the competing sports at many levels (tennis, golf, Olympics) and high school and college sports may not have the means nor the budgets to support such. Where this infomercial loses me is the next leap of POC. Much credibility of it was lost by mentioning that.
The only real problem for transgender might be the interpretation of Title IX and if "athletic opportunities" needs to be deemed to cover this group and how do you cover that group? Idaho is saying, this is determined by your initial genetic makeup (ie. how you were born) not how you now identify yourself (be it surgical or psychological).
Why California picked this battle vs. all the other problems going on, I have no idea.