Bills › 91st General Assembly
Relating to the responsibilities of school districts and charter schools related to the discipline of students who cause violent or nonviolent disruptions
Sponsored by Sen. Kerry Gruenhagen (R)
Topics:K–12 education
Same legislation: SF 2428
Where it is now
- Done: IntroducedJanuary 13, 2026
- Done: SubcommitteeJanuary 15, 2026
- Done: Senate committeeFebruary 23, 2026
- Done: Passes the SenateMarch 10, 202645–0
- Done: House committeeMarch 19, 2026
- Done: Passes the HouseApril 7, 202689–4
- Done: To the GovernorMay 18, 2026
- Done: Signed into lawJune 1, 2026
Became SF 2428 → Its progress continues under the new number. Go to SF 2428 What’s a funnel?
What’s in it
This bill relates to the responsibilities of school districts and charter schools related to the discipline of students who cause violent or nonviolent disruptions.7(2)(m), charter schools, to adopt, in collaboration with teachers and administrative staff employed by the school, policies for different grade levels that describe how a school may discipline a student for making a threat of violence or causing an incident of violence that results in injury or property damage or assault.65A establishes requirements related to the policies.
Read the full explanation
65A to require school districts and charter schools to adopt, in collaboration with teachers and administrative staff employed by the school, policies for different grade levels that describe how a school may discipline a student for causing a violent disruption or nonviolent disruption. The bill defines “nonviolent disruption” to include a disruption to classroom instruction that is a result of disorderly conduct, abusive or profane language, bullying, or repeatedly disruptive behavior. The bill defines “violent disruption” to include a disruption to classroom instruction that is a result of a threat of violence or an incident of violence that results in injury, property damage, or assault. The policies must be consistent with the provisions of Code chapter 256B (special education) and rules adopted by the state board of education for purposes of Code chapter 256B and with certain specified federal laws. The policies must require each attendance center within the school district to create a placement review committee that is responsible for determining when a student who was removed from the classroom pursuant to the bill’s provisions may return to the classroom. The bill establishes the membership of the placement review committee. The policies must authorize a teacher to remove a student who causes a nonviolent disruption from the teacher’s classroom and place the student under the supervision of the principal for at least minutes. A student who is removed from the classroom pursuant to this provision is required to make up any work that the student missed while the student was under the supervision of the principal. In addition, the policies must prohibit the principal from returning a student who is removed from the classroom to the teacher’s classroom without the teacher’s consent, unless the placement review committee determines that the student should be returned to the classroom. The policies must also require the principal to inform the teacher of the disciplinary actions taken against the student who was removed from the classroom as soon as is reasonably possible after the student’s removal. The policies must require that if a student is removed from the classroom more than once in one school year, the teacher, a qualified guidance counselor, the student’s parent or legal guardian, if the student is not an emancipated minor, and the student are required to participate in a meeting to discuss the student’s nonviolent disruptions and to establish a behavioral plan and a course of discipline to correct the student’s behavior, which may include placement in an alternative learning environment. The policies must require a teacher to remove a student who causes a violent disruption from the teacher’s classroom and place the student under the supervision of the principal. The policies must prohibit the principal from returning a student who is removed from the classroom pursuant to this provision to the teacher’s classroom without the teacher’s consent, unless the placement review committee determines that the student should be returned to the classroom. However, the placement review committee shall not have the authority to require a student to return to a teacher’s classroom if the teacher removed the student from the teacher’s classroom because the student caused a violent disruption that included the student assaulting the teacher, and the teacher does not consent to allowing the student to return to the teacher’s classroom. The policies must require that a student removed from the classroom pursuant to this provision be suspended, expelled, or placed in an alternative learning environment. The bill makes conforming changes.
From the explanation printed with the bill as introduced, written by the Legislative Services Agency. Changed since by amendments S-5166, H-8306, S-5087; see Amendments. Full bill text · What changed before it passed
Senate subcommittee
Named January 15, 2026. On January 22, 2026 it recommended passage.
Three legislators hear a bill first and recommend what the committee should do; it’s the best time to weigh in. How to take part
2 written public comments to its subcommittee: March 18, 2026 (1), January 22, 2026 (1) · on the Legislature’s site
Fiscal note
4 million by an urban district to implement the pilot program. The Bill directs the DE to fully fund the pilot program using moneys appropriated by the General Assembly for the program unless participating school districts have the funds for their participation in the program. The Bill is anticipated to have no fiscal impact on the DE for the implementation of policies regarding disruptive students.
- Final Fiscal Note — Removal of Disruptive Students from Classrooms · May 20, 2026
- Removal of Disruptive Students from Classrooms · April 23, 2026
- Removal of Disruptive Students from Classrooms · April 14, 2026
Nonpartisan cost estimates from the Legislative Services Agency’s Fiscal Services Division. The newest is first. Reading a fiscal note
Iowa Code it changes
Read from the bill as introduced. Each links to every bill touching that chapter of the Iowa Code. How the Code works
Lobbying
7 for · 4 against · 12 undecided · Who →
Family tree
Where this legislation came from and where it went: earlier tries, the versions it moved through this Assembly, and later bills built on it.
91st General Assembly
Earlier and later bills are matched by wording or an identical title; check the text to be sure it’s the same idea.
Similar bills
- HF 2435 Relating to education, including by modifying provisions related to when children may enro…91st General Assembly · In committeeVery similar
Matched by the wording of each bill’s explanation, or an identical title. Companion bills and renumbered versions of this bill aren’t listed; they’re the same bill.