Republican lawmakers may take additional steps to remove “sexually explicit material” from schools, Iowa House Speaker Pat Grassley indicated on January 8. Speaking to fellow legislators, Grassley also blamed schools for politicizing what he called “a simple solution to protect Iowa’s students from inappropriate material.”

Grassley was the only House or Senate leader to address the school book bans in opening remarks on the first day of the legislature’s 2024 session. His comments came ten days after a federal court blocked the state of Iowa from enforcing a ban on library books and classroom materials that describe or depict sex acts.

This clip from Grassley’s speech comes from the official Iowa House video feed:

The speaker acknowledged the mass shooting at Perry High School on January 4, saying the tragic event reinforced the need to ensure “Iowa is a safe place to live and raise a family.”

He then explained that “keeping students safe” can mean “many things”: “investing in school security,” “prioritizing school resource officers,” “protecting children’s mental health,” “teaching resilience over victimhood,” and “ridding our classrooms and school libraries of inappropriate material.”

In late December, U.S. District Court Judge Stephen Locher determined that Iowa’s restrictions on library books in K-12 schools were “staggeringly broad” and “unlikely to satisfy the First Amendment under any standard of scrutiny.” The court enjoined the parts of Senate File 496 that prohibit certain books at all grade levels, and ban instruction “relating to gender identity and sexual orientation” in grades K-6.

Alluding to that litigation, Grassley told Iowa House members on January 8,

I can’t wrap my head around how this issue of sexually explicit material in schools got so convoluted. I am still shocked that we actually have people willing to fight this hard to keep pornographic material in our schools. What is the educational value of oral sex scenes in school library books? I am completely confused and disturbed by this being the case.

Republican lawmakers and attorneys for the state have highlighted illustrations or passages from a few books, such as Gender Queer by Maia Kobabe or All Boys Aren’t Blue by George M. Johnson, to justify the provisions of SF 496. But the U.S. District Court found the law “is incredibly broad and has resulted in the removal of hundreds of books from school libraries, including, among others, nonfiction history books, classic works of fiction, Pulitzer Prize winning contemporary novels, books that regularly appear on Advanced Placement exams, and even books designed to help students avoid being victimized by sexual assault.”

Grassley sought to blame school districts for the legal problems, telling colleagues,

Last session, we passed a simple solution to protect Iowa’s students from inappropriate material. It should have been an easy policy for schools to implement. But instead, some chose to politicize this issue. And if we need to pass additional legislation this session, we will.

In defense of the book bans, the state had argued in federal court that some school districts were reading SF 496 with “tunnel vision” and pulling books that referred to sex without the “descriptions or visual depictions of a sex act” that the law prohibits. However, Judge Locher’s order was grounded in the wording of the statute itself. As the court interpreted “the plain language” of the law, “Iowa school districts are not going far enough in removing books.” Even the dictionary could be prohibited, for defining terms such as sexual intercourse.

Grassley didn’t clarify whether a legislative response to the court ruling might deal with classroom instruction on LGBTQ topics as well as school library books. His prepared remarks for the occasion read in part, “And if we need to pass additional legislation this year to protect our kids from this over-sexualization, we will.” (emphasis added to highlight words in the script that were not delivered)

The federal court order suggested that an “obscenity-light” standard targeting sexually explicit materials in schools might be constitutional. To comply with longstanding U.S. Supreme Court precedent, such a law would need to consider whether the material has “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value,” when considered as a whole.

A new law on school library or classroom materials would also need to be clear about what is prohibited. Judge Locher found the book restrictions in SF 496 were not only overbroad but also vague: “One of the major areas of uncertainty is the level of detail a book passage must have before it constitutes a description or visual depiction of a sex act; for example, is a passage stating that two characters ‘made passionate love’ or ‘had sexual intercourse’ enough to require removal?”

Governor Kim Reynolds has not expressly endorsed new legislation to limit school books or teaching, but in her written statement about the federal court order, she asserted that “Instruction on gender identity and sexual orientation has no place in kindergarten through sixth grade classrooms.” Reynolds also claimed “society is so intent on over-sexualizing our young children” and promised “to do my part to protect their innocence.”

This post will be updated if Reynolds discusses the issue in her Condition of the State address to the Iowa legislature on January 9.

Top image: Iowa Senate Majority Leader Jack Whitver, Governor Kim Reynolds, and Iowa House Speaker Pat Grassley pose at the Iowa GOP’s annual legislative breakfast on January 8. Photo first published on Grassley’s official Facebook page.