Read the full stored bill text
House
File
36
-
Introduced
HOUSE
FILE
36
BY
GUSTOFF
A
BILL
FOR
An
Act
relating
to
interpretation
of
law
in
administrative
and
1
judicial
proceedings
under
the
Iowa
administrative
procedure
2
Act.
3
BE
IT
ENACTED
BY
THE
GENERAL
ASSEMBLY
OF
THE
STATE
OF
IOWA:
4
TLSB
1539YH
(2)
91
je/ko
H.F.
36
Section
1.
Section
17A.19,
subsection
10,
paragraph
c,
Code
1
2025,
is
amended
to
read
as
follows:
2
c.
Based
upon
an
erroneous
interpretation
of
a
provision
3
of
law
whose
interpretation
has
not
clearly
been
vested
by
a
4
provision
of
law
in
the
discretion
of
the
agency
.
5
Sec.
2.
Section
17A.19,
subsection
10,
paragraph
l,
Code
6
2025,
is
amended
by
striking
the
paragraph.
7
Sec.
3.
Section
17A.19,
subsection
11,
Code
2025,
is
amended
8
by
striking
the
subsection.
9
Sec.
4.
Section
17A.23,
Code
2025,
is
amended
by
adding
the
10
following
new
subsection:
11
NEW
SUBSECTION
.
5.
Notwithstanding
any
provision
of
the
12
Code
to
the
contrary,
a
court,
or
a
presiding
officer
in
a
13
contested
case
or
other
administrative
action
subject
to
this
14
chapter,
when
interpreting
a
state
statute
or
a
rule
or
other
15
agency
document
subject
to
this
chapter,
shall
not
defer
to
16
an
agency’s
interpretation
of
the
statute,
rule,
or
document,
17
and
must
instead
interpret
its
meaning
and
effect
de
novo.
18
In
an
action
brought
by
or
against
an
agency,
the
court
or
19
officer,
after
applying
all
customary
tools
of
interpretation,
20
must
exercise
any
remaining
doubt
in
favor
of
a
reasonable
21
interpretation
that
limits
agency
authority.
22
EXPLANATION
23
The
inclusion
of
this
explanation
does
not
constitute
agreement
with
24
the
explanation’s
substance
by
the
members
of
the
general
assembly.
25
This
bill
concerns
the
interpretation
of
law
in
26
administrative
and
judicial
proceedings
under
Code
chapter
17A,
27
the
Iowa
administrative
procedure
Act.
28
Under
current
law,
a
court
must
reverse,
modify,
or
grant
29
other
appropriate
relief
from
agency
action
in
specified
30
circumstances
if
it
determines
that
substantial
rights
of
the
31
person
seeking
relief
have
been
prejudiced.
Such
circumstances
32
include
agency
action
based
upon
an
irrational,
illogical,
33
or
wholly
unjustifiable
interpretation
of
a
provision
of
law
34
whose
interpretation
has
clearly
been
vested
by
a
provision
35
-1-
LSB
1539YH
(2)
91
je/ko
1/
2
H.F.
36
of
law
in
the
discretion
of
the
agency.
If
interpretation
1
of
the
provision
of
law
has
not
been
clearly
vested
in
the
2
discretion
of
the
agency,
the
standard
of
review
is
instead
3
whether
the
agency’s
interpretation
is
erroneous.
Current
law
4
also
provides
standards
for
a
court
regarding
the
determination
5
of
the
degree
of
deference
to
be
given
to
the
view
of
an
agency,
6
based
on
whether
a
provision
of
law
has
vested
the
agency
with
7
discretion
over
the
matter
in
question.
The
bill
strikes
these
8
provisions
and
instead
provides
that
a
court
must
reverse,
9
modify,
or
grant
other
appropriate
relief
from
agency
action
10
based
upon
an
erroneous
interpretation
of
a
provision
of
law.
11
The
bill
additionally
prohibits
a
court,
or
a
presiding
12
officer
in
a
contested
case
or
other
administrative
action
13
subject
to
Code
chapter
17A,
when
interpreting
a
state
statute
14
or
a
rule
or
other
agency
document
subject
to
Code
chapter
17A,
15
from
deferring
to
an
agency’s
interpretation
of
the
statute,
16
rule,
or
document;
the
bill
instead
requires
the
court
or
17
officer
to
interpret
its
meaning
and
effect
de
novo.
The
18
bill
requires
the
court
or
officer,
in
an
action
brought
by
19
or
against
an
agency,
after
applying
all
customary
tools
of
20
interpretation,
to
exercise
any
remaining
doubt
in
favor
of
a
21
reasonable
interpretation
that
limits
agency
authority.
22
-2-
LSB
1539YH
(2)
91
je/ko
2/
2