Iowa lawmakers, governor push bills limiting LGBTQ education and local civil rights protections

DES MOINES — Iowa House Republicans on Wednesday advanced legislation that would extend prohibitions on classroom instruction or school-sponsored programming that references sexual orientation or what state law defines as “gender theory” into middle and high schools, moving the bill out of subcommittee on a party-line vote.

  Buy Photo

The move came the same day Gov. Kim Reynolds introduced a separate proposal, House Study Bill 664, that would limit local civil rights ordinances by barring cities and counties from offering protections broader than those in the Iowa Civil Rights Act. Supporters say the bill responds to local efforts to protect transgender Iowans after Reynolds signed legislation last year removing gender identity from the state civil rights code — a move that made Iowa the first state to repeal a previously protected class.

If enacted, the proposal would directly affect communities such as Iowa City and Coralville, which recently reaffirmed LGBTQ+ protections in city code following the Legislature’s rollback of statewide safeguards.

The 2025 law repealed protections for transgender Iowans against discrimination in housing, employment, lending, public accommodations and more based on gender identity, while the Iowa Civil Rights Act continues to protect Iowans based on sex, race, disability and other characteristics.

  Buy Photo

Iowa City’s Human Rights Ordinance bars discrimination in credit, education, employment, housing and public accommodation on the basis of gender identity, sexual orientation and other protected classes. Coralville’s ordinance, adopted in 2007, similarly prohibits discrimination. Both would be undercut by Reynolds’ proposal.

Critics warn of erosion of local control and civil rights

Critics say the bill would invalidate long-standing local ordinances and weaken local control. Zach Rus, executive director of Iowa Safe Schools, said the proposal targets cities that moved to fill gaps left by state action.

“Instead of working toward lowering costs for Iowans, this bill cements her legacy of hostility toward civil rights and continues to repel people away from our state,” Rus said of Reynolds.

Iowa Safe Schools says its mission is to create safe, supportive environments for LGBTQ and allied youth through education, outreach, advocacy and victim services.

Reynolds and Republican lawmakers argue adding gender identity to the Iowa Civil Rights Act in 2007 improperly “elevated” transgender rights and allowed access to spaces such as bathrooms, locker rooms and sports teams they say should be reserved for people assigned female at birth.

  Buy Photo

After signing the repeal last year, Reynolds said the change “safeguards the rights of women and girls.”

Civil rights groups, faith leaders and business owners counter that the law makes Iowa less competitive and less welcoming. Critics note transgender people, who make up an estimated 1 percent of the state’s population, already face higher risks of bullying, suicide and housing instability.

Education bill advances amid emotional testimony

Meanwhile, the House Education Committee advanced House File 2121 late Wednesday night, on a 14-9 vote, with two Republicans -- Reps. Chad Ingels of Randalia and Thomas Moore of Griswold -- joining Democrats in voting against the bill. With committee passage of the bill, it’s now eligible for debate and a vote on the House floor as early as next week.

A subcommittee had advanced the bill 2-1 along party lines earlier in the day.

HF 2121 would expand Iowa’s existing ban on instruction related to sexual orientation and what state law defines as “gender theory” — currently limited to kindergarten through sixth grade — to include grades seven through 12. The K-6 restriction remains under a partial federal court injunction.

  Buy Photo

Under the proposal, school districts, charter schools and innovation zone schools would be barred from offering any program, curriculum, instruction or health education that references sexual orientation or gender identity for older students.

Supporters described the bill as narrowly tailored to keep schools focused on academics. Hayes, who chaired the subcommittee, said the legislation simply extends an existing standard, and pushed back on claims that the bill would broadly silence students or teachers.

Opponents, however, argued the measure would create uncertainty for educators and restrict critical information for students approaching adulthood, particularly within required health and human growth education. Several speakers warned it would further marginalize LGBTQ+ students and exacerbate already high rates of depression and suicide.

  Buy Photo

Audrey Henning, a junior at Valley High School, told lawmakers that limiting discussion of sexual orientation would harm students’ mental health and academic understanding. In her AP literature classes, she said, “understanding the sexuality of an author or character is often very important to understanding the story you’re reading.” She added that for some students, “their only safe space may be a teacher in school.”

Levin echoed those concerns, saying as a queer lawmaker she strongly opposed the bill, and questioned why the legislature would further regulate an issue already before the courts.

“To pretend that queer people do not exist is neither workable nor wise in thinking about how we care for our kids,” she said.

Bethany Snyder, an Urbandale parent who said she is a lesbian raising a high schooler with a partner who is a transgender man, said measures like HF 2121 “teach kids which families can be talked about easily and which ones are better left unnamed.”

  Buy Photo

“And like every parent, we want our child to feel safe at school, supported by the adults around her, and prepared for adulthood,” Snyder said. “But bills like this … teach kids like mine that their family is easier to erase than to respect. Schools should reflect the real lives of students they serve. The real world my children should be prepared for includes LGBTQ people like parents, teachers, legislators, historical figures, neighbors, co-workers.”

Jeff Anderson, legislative advocate for the Iowa Conference of the United Methodist Church, said comprehensive, medically accurate and age-appropriate instruction — including information about gender identity and sexual orientation — helps ensure students are better informed, healthier and safer. He argued that excluding those topics from classrooms risks harming all students and could inflict emotional and psychological harm on LGBTQ students in particular, adding that curriculum decisions should be grounded in science rather than political or ideological agendas.

Supporters, including Katherine Bogaards of Protect My Innocence and Ryan Benn of The Family Leader Foundation, argued the bill protects parental authority and prevents ideological indoctrination, with Benn insisting it governs what schools teach, not what students discuss among themselves.

“As a grandparent, I am grateful to see this common sense legislation brought forward,” Bogaards said. “House File 2121 gives families confidence that schools will remain focused on academics and age appropriate research based health education, not topics that confuse or overwhelm students.

“Supporting this bill is about preserving family values, respecting parental authority and ensuring minors are allowed to grow up without unnecessary pressure related to sexual orientation and gender identity.”

After the meeting, Hayes emphasized the need to refocus on academic outcomes.

“As we look at how we rank in math and science, it’s important that we stay focused on academics,” she said, adding she would consider amendments.

The Gazette’s Megan Woolard contributed to this report.

Comments: (319) 398-8499; tom.barton@thegazette.com