Iowa Senate Bill SJR2002

Iowa 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Filed/Introduced: 1/27/26
• Introduced: 1/12/26
• Refer: 1/12/26

Caption

A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Iowa prohibiting the power of judicial review.

Summary

SJR 2002 is a proposed constitutional amendment that would remove the power of judicial review from Iowa courts. Under the resolution, the judicial power of the state would remain vested in the supreme court, district courts, and other courts established by the legislature, but those courts would generally no longer be able to decide whether a law passed by the General Assembly is consistent with the Iowa Constitution. The proposal includes a narrow exception for the supreme court’s review of legislative apportionment plans under Article III, section 36. If adopted, the amendment would first need to be referred to the next General Assembly, published before that election, and then approved again by that subsequent legislature before being submitted to Iowa voters for ratification. In practical terms, the resolution would significantly alter the balance of power between the legislative and judicial branches by limiting courts’ ability to invalidate statutes on constitutional grounds.

Impact

The bill would amend Article V, section 1 of the Iowa Constitution to eliminate judicial review of state laws, except for the specified apportionment exception. This would affect the authority of Iowa courts to strike down legislation as unconstitutional and would reduce a major check on legislative power. Because it is a constitutional amendment, it would not change ordinary statutes directly, but it would reshape the legal framework governing how statutes are reviewed and enforced in Iowa.

Sentiment

The available record suggests limited support and no recorded floor debate or vote history, but the bill’s last action was a subcommittee recommendation for indefinite postponement, indicating a lack of momentum. The proposal appears to have been treated as a significant constitutional change rather than routine legislation. Overall, the procedural history points to skepticism or reluctance among legislators to advance it.

Contention

The central point of contention is the elimination of judicial review, which would prevent courts from determining whether enacted laws comply with the Iowa Constitution. Supporters of such a change would likely view it as a way to strengthen legislative authority, while opponents would see it as weakening constitutional checks and balances and reducing protections against unconstitutional laws. The narrow exception for apportionment review suggests some recognition that judicial oversight is still considered necessary in at least one area, but the broader proposal remains highly controversial because it would fundamentally alter the role of the judiciary.