A Christian summer camp nestled in the foothills near Bailey, Colorado, is facing imminent closure unless a federal judge intervenes. Camp IdRaHaJe, a longstanding institution founded in 1948, is battling the state of Colorado over new regulations concerning gender identity policies. The camp, a portmanteau of "I’d rather have Jesus," operates week-long summer programs for children aged six to seventeen across its 262-acre property, anticipating hosting between 2,500 and 3,000 youngsters this summer. This legal battle centers on the Colorado Department of Early Childhood Care and Education (CDEC) rules requiring licensees to allow campers to use facilities aligning with their gender identity. Camp IdRaHaJe argues that these rules violate their religious freedom and intends to continue operating under its traditional policies, which differentiate campers by biological sex. The camp’s stance is rooted in a deeply held belief that "God has immutably created each person as either male or female in His image," as outlined in its doctrinal statement, a key element of the lawsuit. This foundational belief emphasizes the "differentiation of the sexes, male and female, is part of the divine image in the human race." The camp’s legal team, led by Andrea Dill with Alliance Defending Freedom, contends that the government has no authority to dictate religious summer camps' beliefs about human sexuality, framing the situation as a critical defense of religious freedom. The lawsuit specifically requests an exception from the CDEC rules, arguing that the regulations represent a "lights out" scenario for religious organizations upholding their beliefs.

Camp IdRaHaJe welcomes children of all faiths and backgrounds, and in 2021, even accommodated a camper experiencing gender dysphoria, ensuring the child used facilities consistent with their biological sex, following a discussion with the child and their mother. This demonstrates the camp’s commitment to its core values while acknowledging the complexities of individual identity. The camp’s mission is to "present the truth of the Gospel to children who are building character and lifelong memories." However, the Colorado government’s regulations are perceived as a threat to this mission, particularly given the global decline in support for similar policies.

The legal dispute is currently before U.S. Magistrate Judge Reid Neureiter, who is considering the camp’s request for an exception. CDEC has issued a statement acknowledging the pending litigation and stating that it will address the matter through appropriate legal channels, offering no further comment at this time. This situation highlights a broader tension between religious freedom and evolving societal attitudes regarding gender identity. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for religious organizations and summer camps nationwide. The core issue revolves around balancing the state’s interest in protecting children’s well-being with the camp’s constitutional right to operate according to its religious beliefs. The legal proceedings are ongoing, and the fate of Camp IdRaHaJe remains uncertain, dependent on the judge’s ruling and the broader legal landscape surrounding religious freedom and gender identity. This case represents a crucial test of these competing interests and could set a precedent for similar disputes in the future. The camp’s continued operation hinges on securing a favorable legal outcome, safeguarding its ability to fulfill its mission and uphold its deeply held religious convictions.

Ultimately, the legal battle is about more than just a summer camp; it’s about the fundamental principles of religious freedom and the right to practice one’s faith without government interference. The CDEC’s response underscores the agency’s commitment to enforcing its regulations, highlighting the complexities of navigating these sensitive issues. The legal team’s arguments center on the importance of protecting religious freedom, while the CDEC emphasizes its responsibility to ensure the safety and well-being of all children in its care. This ongoing dispute represents a critical intersection of legal, religious, and social concerns, with far-reaching implications for the future. The legal arguments and the state’s response will undoubtedly shape the debate surrounding these issues for years to come, representing a significant test of the balance between individual rights and governmental regulations.