Federal Court Temporarily Blocks Book Bans and "Don't Say Gay" In Iowa

Iowa’s SF 496, which allowed unconstitutional book bans, outed trans students, and curbed the promotion of GSAs, has been drastically reigned in—at least for the time being.

On May 15, Judge Stephen H. Loche of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa blocked key provisions of Senate File 496, a 2023 law targeting school libraries and LGBTQ students—at least, for now.

After its passage, Lambda Legal, the ACLU of Iowa, and Jenner & Block LLP filed a lawsuit on behalf of students, teachers and community advocates. The law’s implementation was paused by a temporary injunction, but that was lifted by a federal appeals court in 2024, facilitating the removal of 3,000 books from some Iowa public schools. The reason was, under the law, these materials were deemed as not “age-appropriate.” Censored books included “1984” by George Orwell, “Wicked,” by Gregory Maguire, and “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings,” by Maya Angelou.

“Plaintiffs highlight three particular provisions of SF 496 that have caused and will continue to cause the most damage,” the original complaint, filed in October 2024, reads. This includes “those relating to the content of school libraries, those relating to the discussion of gender identity or sexual orientation, and those requiring the reporting of students expressing a wish for affirmation in their gender identity.”

As per a press release from Lambda Legal, the court has now declared that significant chunks of the bill are unconstitutional. “The don’t-say-LGBTQ+ portion of the law has been sharply limited,” the press release states. “GSAs [Gay-Straight Alliances] and their activities must be permitted without restriction. Books and materials may not be banned merely for containing transgender characters or same-sex relationships. Teachers can answer student questions on these topics, and they must be permitted to refer to their partners, even if same-sex.”

The judge also found that the statute cannot be broadly applied to school libraries, materials or programs. It can only be enforced for mandatory in-class instruction, and only for K-6 grade levels.

Meanwhile, the judge ruled, the “forced outing” provision only applies to changing pronouns. Other accommodations, such as a name change, do not fall under the mandate. (Forced outing policies across the country have been weaponized by anti-trans groups under the rallying cry of “parental rights”—however, civil rights groups warn they put kids in danger.)

Finally, the press release says, the court ”continues to block the book ban–which would have required the removal of books with certain types of ‘sexual content’ from all school libraries–in its entirety.”

During legal proceedings, the State had argued that these restrictions were not unconstitutional because they were “neutral”; because they targeted all discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity, not just that of queer or trans people. However, the court found compelling evidence that the spirit and the practice of the law may be more targeted, citing “post-enactment comments by legislators and evidence of how individual school districts have responded to the law.”

SF 496 further “superimposes a distinction between ‘neutral’ references to gender identity and sexual orientation (which are permitted) and normative or explanatory references to those concepts (which are not) despite the absence of any such distinction in the plain text of the statute.”

“Stated differently,” the ruling continues, “the State Defendants cannot have it both ways. If it is ‘absurd’ to interpret the Gender Identity/Sexual Orientation Restriction as forbidding schools from dividing sports teams or other extracurricular programs into groups based on gender identity, it means the Iowa Legislature only intended for the law to restrict speech relating to some types of gender identity. This is viewpoint discrimination.”

The judge further explains:

As many Iowans celebrate this news, challenges remain. A preliminary injunction will not be final unless followed by a permanent injunction. But it could be seen as a promising sign: that as the federal government and some state legislatures toss progress and precedent out the window, especially where are LGBTQ rights are concerned, parts of the judiciary have the potential to provide much-needed checks and balances.

“The federal district court has blocked the state from enforcing many of the worst aspects of SF 496,” said Thomas Story, an attorney with the ACLU of Iowa, in a press release. “Under this order, Iowa teachers no longer can be disciplined simply because their classroom contains a Pride flag or their library contains books with LGBTQ+ characters. Students of all ages are once again free to join GSAs and to promote them to their classmates. This law, with certain narrow exceptions, should no longer stand in the way of school districts supporting efforts to include and support their LGBTQ+ students.”