Bills › 91st General Assembly
Prohibiting warrant resolution clinics, including enforcement mechanisms, providing penalties, and including effective date provisions
Same legislation: HF 2787
Progress
- IntroducedApril 22, 2026
- Subcommittee—
- CommitteeApril 23, 2026
- Passed House—
- Passed Senate—
- Signed—
Became HF 2787 → Its progress continues under the new number. Go to HF 2787 What’s a funnel?
What’s in it
This bill prohibits warrant resolution clinics and includes enforcement mechanisms. _____ The bill defines “warrant resolution clinic” as any prearranged event, program, assembly, arrangement, docket setting, or coordinated effort, whether formal or informal, other than a regularly scheduled court proceeding held within a courthouse or judicial facility, designed or having the practical effect of allowing individuals with outstanding arrest warrants to appear and resolve such warrants without being subject to immediate arrest and custodial processing, regardless of how such event, program, assembly, arrangement, docket setting, or effort is designated or characterized.
Read the full explanation
The bill provides that an entity, organization, county attorney, law enforcement agency, judicial officer, nonprofit organization, or any other person shall not organize, sponsor, host, fund, promote, or participate in a warrant resolution clinic. A person who has an outstanding warrant for the person’s arrest may only resolve the warrant by surrendering to a peace officer or at a law enforcement agency, appearing at a scheduled court hearing as directed by a magistrate or judge under standard judicial procedures, or through a written motion filed in an individual, pending case, agreed to by the prosecuting attorney, and ruled on by the court under standard judicial procedures in the ordinary course of the case. The bill prohibits the use of public funds or facilities for the purpose of hosting a warrant resolution clinic. The bill provides that a person shall not evade or attempt to evade the prohibitions of the bill by conducting a substantially equivalent program, event, or arrangement under a different name, structure, or designation. The bill provides examples of substantially equivalent programs that are prohibited. A public official or employee who knowingly violates the bill commits a simple misdemeanor, and is also subject to removal from office or employment pursuant to applicable law. _____ program in violation of the bill commits a simple misdemeanor and is also subject to a civil penalty of not more than $10,000 per violation, recoverable by the attorney general in an action in district court. A simple misdemeanor is punishable by confinement for no more than days and a fine of at least $105 but not more than $855. The bill provides that any person may report a suspected violation of the bill to the office of the attorney general. The attorney general may investigate suspected violations and may bring a civil enforcement action in district court seeking injunctive relief, civil penalties, and recovery of costs and reasonable attorney fees. The bill provides that any resident of a county in which a warrant resolution clinic or substantially equivalent program is conducted or planned in violation of the bill may bring a civil action in district court to obtain injunctive or declaratory relief to prevent or restrain the violation, recover actual damages, and recover reasonable attorney fees and court costs. The bill provides that any county organizing, sponsoring, hosting, funding, promoting, or participating in a warrant resolution clinic is not entitled to receive any funds having their origin in court debt including but not limited to fees or remittances arising from or related to the collection of past due fines and fees constituting court debt. The bill takes effect upon enactment.
From the explanation printed with the bill as introduced, written by the Legislative Services Agency. Amendments adopted later aren’t reflected. Full bill text
History
Meetings
- Friday, May 1 · 12:00 PMJudiciary committee · Room 116Official meeting page
- Thursday, April 23 · 9:00 AMGovernment Oversight committee · RM 103Official meeting page
Votes
Select a floor vote to see how each legislator voted.
Lobbyist declarations
- Bitches Get Stuff DoneAgainst
- Iowa Police Chief Association (FKA Iowa Police Executive Forum)Against
- NAACP, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Iowa-NebraskaAgainst
- City of Cedar RapidsUndecided
- Iowa County Attorneys AssociationUndecided
- Iowa Fraternal Order of PoliceUndecided
- Iowa Magistrate's AssociationUndecided
- Iowa Police Chief Association (FKA Iowa Police Executive Forum)Undecided
- Iowa State Bar AssociationUndecided
- Iowa State Sheriffs' & Deputies' AssociationUndecided
- Polk County - Board of SupervisorsUndecided
- State Public Defender's OfficeUndecided
- Urban County CoalitionUndecided
- Iowa Police Chief Association (FKA Iowa Police Executive Forum)Withdrawn
Grouped by organization. Lobbying overview →