Federal court allows Iowa to enforce anti-LGBTQ+ book ban, but questions remain

A federal appeals court just ruled that Iowa can its enact bill banning LGBTQ+ books from classrooms.

The ruling, from a three-judge panel of the Eight Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, decided that the preliminary injunction issued by a lower court was based on a “flawed analysis” of the law.

Related:

Despite last-minute GOP push, all anti-LGBTQ+ bills fail in Iowa legislature

Anti-LGBTQ+ bills keep failing. Could the tide be turning?

The bill, SF 496, requires parental consent before giving their child any book containing content relating to LGBTQ+ topics. This effectively censors LGBTQ+ books from youth living in antagonistic homes. It was signed into law last year by Gov. Kim Reynolds (R).

Stay connected to your community

Connect with the issues and events that impact your community at home and beyond by subscribing to our newsletter.

Daily

Weekly

Good News

The bill was challenged in the court case Iowa Safe Schools, et al v. Reynolds.

The three-judge panel specifically ruled that the law can still be challenged in further court proceedings, and they invited more insight into the topic. The judges also rebuffed points made by Iowa’s state government that were considered dangerous by the ACLU, Lambda Legal, and legal firm Jenner & Block.

In a joint statement, the ACLU, Lambda Legal, and Jenner & Block criticized the ruling, saying, “Iowa families, and especially LGBTQ+ students who will again face bullying, intimidation, and censorship as they return for a new school year, are deeply frustrated and disappointed by this delay. Denying LGBTQ+ youth the chance to see themselves represented in classrooms and books sends a harmful message of shame and stigma that should not exist in schools.”

“We are, however, encouraged by the Eighth Circuit’s complete rejection of the State’s most dangerous arguments,” their statement continued. “The appeals court acknowledged that our student clients have been harmed by the law and have the right to bring suit. The court also rejected the State’s claim that banning books in libraries is a form of protected government speech. We will ask the district court to block the law again at the earliest opportunity.”

However, Gov. Reynolds celebrated the ruling in a statement, “Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit confirmed what we already knew—it should be parents who decide when and if sexually-explicit books are appropriate for their children. Here in Iowa, we will continue to focus on excellence in education and partnerships with parents and educators.”

While Reynolds and other Republican politicians have claimed that book bans seek to keep children from accessing “sexually-explicit” content, authors whose books are targeted by these bans are most frequently female, people of color, and/or LGBTQ+ individuals, according to the free-speech organization PEN America. Approximately 30% of the banned titles from the 2022-2023 school year included either characters of color or discussions of race and racism, and an additional 30% included LGBTQ+ characters or themes, the organization added.

Nevertheless, the Iowa attorney general, Brenna Bird, also celebrated the ruling, writing, “We went to court to defend Iowa’s schoolchildren and parental rights, and we won. This victory ensures age-appropriate books and curriculum in school classrooms and libraries. With this win, parents will no longer have to fear what their kids have access to in schools when they are not around.”

Joshua Brown, president of the Iowa State Education Association (ISEA), condemned the ruling. The ISEA was part of a separate lawsuit concerning this bill.

“Banning essential books in our schools is a burden for our educators, who will face punishment for not guessing which book fits into a supposed offensive category, and for our students, who are deprived of reading from great authors with valuable stories,” the ISEA wrote. “If Iowa’s elected leaders truly valued education professionals, they would leave important classroom decisions to the local school districts and the experts who work in them—not make what we teach our students a game of political football.”

Don't forget to share: