By attorneys Logan Brundage, Jazmine Polk and Rebecca Reif
House File 856 was signed by the Governor on May 27, 2025 and a large portion of the bill became effective upon signing. HF 856 imposes new restrictions on public entities, prohibiting the state, counties, cities, townships, public schools and universities, and others from spending public money—from any source—on establishing or contracting for a diversity, equity, and inclusion office and on employing or contracting for a diversity, equity, and inclusion officer.
The new law defines “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (“DEI”) for purposes of the law’s restrictions, as well as DEI “office” and “officer.” First, DEI is defined to cover an array of acts or topics, described below:
--Efforts to influence the composition of a student body or employee base regarding race, sex, color, or ethnicity, except as may be required or prohibited by state and federal anti-discrimination laws;
--Promotion of differential treatment on the basis of race, color, or ethnicity;
--Providing special benefits to individuals on the basis of race, color, or ethnicity;
--Promulgating policies or procedures to encourage preferential treatment or provide special benefits to individuals on the basis of race, color, or ethnicity;
--Trainings, programming, or activities to encourage preferential treatment or provide special benefits to individuals on the basis of race, color, or ethnicity;
--Any effort to promote—as the official position of the public entity: o unconscious bias or implicit bias,
o unconscious bias or implicit bias,
o cultural appropriation,
o allyship,
o transgender ideology,
o microaggressions,
o group marginalization,
o anti-racism,
o systemic oppression,
o social justice,
o intersectionality,
o neopronouns,
o heteronormativity,
o disparate impact,
o gender theory,
o racial privilege,
o sexual privilege, or
o “any formulation of these concepts.”
A DEI “office” is any department, or other organizational component of a public entity, responsible for creating, planning, implementing, or promoting policies, procedures, programming, training, practices, or other activities “related to” DEI. Meanwhile, a DEI “officer” is either a public employee or independent contractor whose duties “relate to” DEI, and, essentially, the work encompassed by a DEI office.
HF 856 contains a number of exclusions which permit some work or activities that would otherwise qualify as DEI acts to receive public money. These include legal offices staffed by licensed attorneys who are responsible for legal compliance with federal civil rights laws (e.g., Title IX and ADA); academic departments offering courses on DEI topics, but not establishing policies and procedures for the school or other departments; offices engaged in recruitment; student organizations and their advisors; employees engaging in teaching, research, or the production of creative works; guest speakers or guest performers; licensed professionals providing mental or physical health services; or employees or offices required by federal government contract. This list of excluded activities or work may still receive public funding under HF 856.
The law also includes enforcement mechanisms for claims of violations. The State Attorney General’s office can pursue a writ of mandamus action, meaning the AG asks a court to address the alleged violation. Additionally, an enrolled student or an alumnus of a public school or a public employee of the alleged violating entity may bring a civil action in court to seek to stop the alleged violation(s), called an injunction. Depending on the circumstances, HF 856 allows for these enforcement actions to be brought in the Iowa district court in the county in which the public entity is located, or a claimant may bring an action in their home county, which may be different than the county where the public entity is located.
Finally, HF 856 requires also amended Iowa Code 261J, which previously applied to the public universities governed by the Board of Regents. Community colleges are now included in Iowa Code chapter 261J’s prohibitions on DEI, but do not have to report to the General Assembly on their compliance with the law, which the Regents-governed institutions must do annually.
About Ahlers & Cooney's Client Alerts
Our Client Alerts are intended to provide occasional general comments on new developments in Federal and State law and regulations which we believe might be of interest to our clients. The Client Alerts should not be considered opinions of Ahlers & Cooney, P.C., and are not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should not under any circumstance act upon the information in this publication without seeking specific professional counsel. Please note that AI tools may not accurately interpret or apply the legal information contained in this alert; reliance on such tools is not a substitute for professional legal advice. Ahlers & Cooney will be pleased to provide additional details regarding any article upon request. Additional copies of this Client Alert may be obtained by contacting any attorney in the Firm or by visiting the Firm's website at www.ahlerslaw.com.
©2025 Ahlers & Cooney, P.C. All Rights Reserved.
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. This disclosure is required by rule of the Supreme Court of Iowa. Memberships and offices in legal fraternities and legal societies, technical and professional licenses, and memberships in scientific, technical and professional associations and societies of law or field of practice does not mean that a lawyer is a specialist or expert in a field of law, nor does it mean that such lawyer is necessarily any more expert or competent than any other lawyer. All potential clients are urged to make their own independent investigation and evaluation of any lawyer being considered. This notice is required by rule of the Supreme Court of Iowa.