Iowa law letting authorities charge people facing deportation blocked for now

Des MoinES, Iowa – A federal judge on Monday temporarily blocked an Iowa law that would have allowed state authorities to bring criminal charges against people with pending deportation orders or who were previously denied entry into the U.S.

U.S. District Court Judge Stephen Locher issued a preliminary injunction because he said the U.S. Department of Justice and civil rights groups that filed suit against the state would likely succeed in their argument that federal immigration law nullified the law passed this spring by Iowa lawmakers. He halted enforcement of the law “pending further proceedings.”

“As a matter of policy, the new legislation may be defensible,” Locher wrote in his decision. “As a matter of constitutional law, it is not.”

The Iowa law, which was set to take effect July 1, would allow authorities to bring charges against people who have pending deportation orders or who were previously removed or denied admission to the U.S. to leave the US or be prosecuted and could face prison time before deportation.

In passing the law, Iowa’s Republican-majority Legislature and the Republican Party Governor Kim Reynolds said they took action because Democratic President Biden’s administration has not been effective in controlling immigration along the country’s southern border.

In arguments last week before Locher, the state said the Iowa law would only allow state officials and courts to enforce federal law, not create new law. Federal authorities determine who violates U.S. immigration law, argued Patrick Valencia, Iowa’s deputy attorney general, but once determined, the person also violated state law.

“We have a law that adopts the federal standard,” said Valencia.

However, the federal government and civil rights groups said the Iowa law violated the federal government’s exclusive authority over immigration matters and would create a series of problems and confusion.

DOJ attorney Christopher Eiswerth and American Immigration Council representative Emma Winger said Iowa’s new law does not make an exception for people who have already been deported but are now in the country legally, including those seeking asylum.

The law is similar to but less comprehensive than a Texas law that was in effect for only a few confusing hours in March before being suspended by a three-judge panel of a federal appeals court.

The Justice Department also announced it would try to block a similar law in Oklahoma.

Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird said in a statement that she would appeal the judge’s ruling.

“I am disappointed in today’s court ruling that prevents Iowa from preventing illegal reentry and keeping our communities safe,” Bird said. “Because Biden refuses to secure our borders, he has left the states no choice but to do the work for him.”

Reynolds issued a statement that also expressed frustration with the judge’s decision and criticized Biden.

“I signed this bill to protect Iowans and our communities from the results of this border crisis: increased crime, overdose deaths and human trafficking,” Reynolds said.

Rita Bettis Austen, legal director of the ACLU of Iowa, one of the organizations that filed the lawsuit, praised the judge’s ruling, saying the law shifted a federal responsibility to local officials who were not prepared to take on the role.

Bettis Austen called the law “one of the worst anti-immigration legislation in Iowa history”, adding that it “exposed even legal immigrants, and even children, to serious harm – arrest, detention, deportation, family separation and incarceration by the State”.