IPR file
The Iowa House of Representatives passed a bill Wednesday evening that expands protections for police and raises penalties for protest-related offenses.
The Iowa House of Representatives passed a bill Wednesday evening that expands protections for police, raises penalties for protest-related crimes, and makes other wide-ranging changes related to law enforcement.
The bill would put a qualified immunity standard into state law and criminalize actions taken by some racial justice protesters. It also deals with some employment-related issues for law enforcement officers, and prohibits cities from discouraging the enforcement of laws, among other provisions.
“We listened to our courageous heroes in law enforcement and we took action,” said Rep. Jarad Klein, R-Keota. “We rely on these men and women every day to keep us safe. They have our backs, and with this piece of legislation here today, we can show them that we have their back, too.”
Another virtual legislative forum with local lawmakers will be held today. State Senator Amy Sinclair, State Representative Jon Thorup and State Representative Joel Fry will be present to answer questions and visit with constituents. In order to maintain security and have the forum run smoothly, participants should submit questions or comments prior to the meeting by emailing any of the legislators.
The forum begins at noon and will be held via
Governor Kim Reynolds recently signed a bill into law adjusting voting processes in Iowa, including shortening the absentee voting window. State Representative Jon Thorup of Knoxville says he did not support the bill until an amendment was added that loosened some of the proposed changes.
“We received a ton of emails on both sides of that issue. There were a large number of people concerned about voter integrity versus voter suppression, that type of thing. The voter security factor is one thing we took a look at. There was an original bill written, I thought went a little too far. I held my support for that until there was a 10-page amendment that I would say made a little more reasonable some of the changes the proponents of the bill wanted to make. So it’s really not as draconian as some people might have you believe.”