Iowa Senate Bill SF335

Iowa 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/17/25
• Refer: 2/17/25

Caption

A bill for an act relating to education, including by modifying provisions related to trainings and curricula provided by school districts and prohibited sexual orientation and gender identity instruction, and implementing prohibitions related to the diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts of institutions of higher learning governed by the state board of regents, community colleges, and public schools.

Impact

If enacted, SF335 would impact existing laws concerning how public educational institutions may engage with topics relating to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Specifically, the bill mandates the elimination of diversity, equity, and inclusion offices in schools while holding teachers and administrators accountable for violations of these prohibitions. Schools found to be engaging in the prohibited practices could face civil penalties up to $50,000, with prevailing parties in legal actions entitled to attorney fees and court costs. This bill is part of a broader trend in legislative measures aiming to regulate educational content and ensure parental control over curriculum matters.

Summary

Senate File 335 (SF335) proposes significant changes to educational policies in Iowa, particularly focusing on the instructions and contents offered to students regarding sexual orientation and gender identity. The bill prohibits school districts, charter schools, and innovation zone schools from delivering education that addresses these topics to students in grades K-6. This includes a ban on any curriculum, tests, or activities promoting discussions on gender identity or sexual orientation. Furthermore, it empowers parents and guardians, as well as school employees, to take legal actions against violators, allowing civil suits for injunctive relief against schools and imposing significant penalties for non-compliance.

Contention

The introduction of SF335 has sparked notable debates among lawmakers, educators, and advocacy groups. Supporters argue this legislation is necessary to protect students and maintain parental authority over school curricula, while critics warn that it undermines inclusivity and may deter necessary discussions about diversity and personal identities in educational settings. Furthermore, there are concerns regarding potential infringements on professional autonomy for educators and the implications this could have on the educational environment and student well-being.

Notable_points

The bill not only limits educational content but also establishes a framework for accountability and enforcement. Administrators are expressly required to act against violations and face consequences if they fail to do so, potentially leading to job loss. These stipulations indicate a shift toward increased scrutiny of educators' roles in addressing sensitive subjects, spotlighting the tension between educational freedom and legislative oversight.