In recent years, Iowa lawmakers have passed numerous pieces of legislation aimed at removing the influence of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives from the state. In 2025, Gov. Kim Reynolds signed an anti-DEI law into place, effectively banning DEI practices from being used in state entities.
Now, the state of Iowa has advanced House File 2711 (HF2711), first introduced as House Study Bill 668. The bill furthers Reynolds’ efforts, threatening the civil protections that have long defined Iowa.
HF2711 seeks to remove the remaining remnants of affirmative action and reform Iowa’s licensure policies. The bill also removes the requirement of de-escalation and bias prevention training for police officers, a provision that was established in the wake of George Floyd’s 2020 death.
“The anti-profiling ordinance passed in 2020 was the result of years of organizing, particularly by CCI, to address documented concerns about racial profiling in our communities,” shared Sharon Zanders-Ackiss, the Racial Justice and Equity Director at Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement. “It required…training for law enforcement, not as a punishment to officers, but as a safeguard to protect residents, especially Black men and women who had disproportionately experienced profiling.”
The bill also allows licensure boards to consider citizenship status in their decisions. This creates uncertainty for non-citizen Iowans who aspire to enter the healthcare or engineering fields, professions that are already facing employment gaps.
Dr. Nikhil Wagle, a local ophthalmologist, believes the bill’s impact would be significant. “Although exact numbers are not known, it is estimated that at least 30 to 35% of physicians in Iowa went to medical school outside of the United States,” said Wagle. “If they were not recruited here, we would have even more significant gaps in patient care and access to care than we already have. This bill would only magnify the problem, all to the detriment of patient care.”
For a state that already ranks 44th in physicians per capita, such laws would only worsen its healthcare problems.
“Iowa already struggles with physician shortages, especially in rural areas, and legal changes that reduce diversity incentives or create uncertainty about licensing could influence where physicians choose to practice or train,” said Wagle.
Minorities feel as though they are not protected or valued in the state. Removing these protections misaligns with Iowan history.
For minority students like senior Nishita Gudipati, this furthers her desire to leave the state and pursue opportunities elsewhere. “I don’t think, as a U.S. permanent resident, I would be supported [in Iowa],” expressed Gudipati. “I would like to go to a place where I would feel more seen and have more access to opportunities to expand my career.”
That sense of disillusionment is among the many reasons Iowa is facing a brain drain–a trend of young professionals leaving the state to seek opportunities elsewhere.
But the debate over HF2711 is about far more than losing qualified workers. It’s about Iowa’s identity.
Historically, the state has often positioned itself as a leader when it comes to civil rights. In the 19th century, the Iowa Supreme Court protected escaped slaves by establishing that once an individual escaped and reached Iowan soil, they were free. In 1838, Iowa allowed unmarried women to own property, a significant development during a time when women were still considered property in other parts of the country. In 1851, Iowa became the second state to legalize interracial marriage. And in 1884, Iowa established one of the first civil rights acts in the country, banning discrimination in public accommodations.
For centuries, Iowa has protected minorities who have systemically suffered in the country. Yet under HF2711, it intends to alienate minority groups.
“In effect, minorities can find themselves facing obstacles that DEI was designed to reduce. Without mechanisms in place to even see or talk about those obstacles, they change how institutions operate day to day, who gets support and which communities feel welcome and protected,” said Zanders-Ackiss. “[…]there will be no mechanisms in place to show the disparity.”
House Speaker Pat Grassley attempted to justify the change. “We’re going to continue to have a conversation on this bill,” said Grassley. “We’ve been very firm in our position that Iowa should be a merit-based state, and so that’s why the bill comes forward.”
But he, like so many others, is missing the point.
The entire purpose of DEI is to ensure people are hired or chosen for opportunities based on their merit by educating against intrinsic biases. DEI training ensures that Americans have the option to unlearn biases regarding race, religion, sexuality, gender and disability. This gives minorities an equal chance to succeed along with their nonminority peers by allowing merit to prevail.
As a state that originally propelled social progress, legislation like HF2711 is misaligned with Iowan history. Iowa must reconsider its anti-DEI practices and work to uplift its citizens, not create barriers for them.
