Last month, Gov. Kim Reynolds took the extraordinary step of filing a lawsuit against the Des Moines Register, asking for an injunction to stop the newspaper from continuing to request copies of four emails written by her staff. The governor asserted the emails were covered by executive privilege, and therefore not subject to being released under Iowa’s Open Records Act. On Friday, the Register filed its response to the governor’s lawsuit.
In the response, attorneys for the paper point out that “no such ‘Executive Privilege’ exists under Iowa law, and to the extent any such privilege does exist, the four withheld emails do not fall within the scope of this privilege.”
“For the past 50 years, the Iowa Legislature has had ample opportunity to incorporate ‘executive privilege’ as a legitimate defense within the open-records law,” the Register’s attorney Susan Elgin wrote in a letter to the governor’s office after it first refused to produce the emails. “The absence of such an amendment unmistakably indicates the Legislature’s intent to exclude this basis from the law.”
Elgin’s letter gave the governor a deadline of April 25 to comply with the Open Records Act and produce copies of the emails. On the morning of April 25, Reynolds filed her lawsuit in Polk County District Court.
The emails are related to Gov. Reynolds’ appearance before a congressional committee on Feb. 5. Reynolds had been invited to testify before the House Oversight Committee about her own reorganization of Iowa’s government in 2023 and 2024, eliminating state agencies and public advisory boards, during a hearing intended by House Republicans to defend and promote the work of Elon Musk’s DOGE. The governor had said more than once that her cuts to state government could serve as a useful model for DOGE’s cuts of federal programs and agencies.
During the hearing, Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, a Democrat from Illinois, asked Reynolds if she agreed with a baseless conspiracy theory about Lutheran Family Services circulated by a member of Trump’s first administration and subsequently boosted by Musk on X, formerly Twitter.
According to Michael Flynn, a conspiracy theorist and prominent MAGA supporter who served briefly as Trump’s National Security Advisor, Lutheran Family Services, well-known for its work helping refugees adjust to life in the U.S., was using refugee resettlement services as a cover for a money-laundering operation. There is no evidence of this, and no reason to believe it’s true. But that didn’t stop Musk from promoting it to his millions of followers.
Responding to Krishnamoorthi’s question, Reynolds gave an evasive reply.
“I can tell you that in Iowa, the taxpayers of Iowa hold me personally responsible and accountable for state government, just as they hold President Trump accountable,” she said.
Pressed to answer the question about the Lutheran Family Services money laundering conspiracy, the governor said, “I can’t speak to that.”
Reynolds’ response made headlines. It came less than two weeks after Lutheran Services in Iowa (LSI) had the federal funding that supports its work with refugee resettlement discontinued, as part of the Trump administration’s overall freeze on such funds.
The day after Reynolds’ testimony, Iowa’s three Lutheran bishops released a letter pushing back against the conspiracy theory.
“The claims that these federal grants are illegal or that these federal grants are connected in any way to money laundering are complete lies,” the bishops said. “The falsehoods strike at the heart of our caring institutions and cast doubt on every Lutheran’s integrity.”
A week after her congressional testimony, Reynolds finally said she “absolutely” did not believe the conspiracy theory was true.
On Feb. 11, Register reporter Tyler Jett filed an open records request seeking emails from the governor’s office regarding the “Lutheran Services controversy, including the terms ‘Lutheran’ and ‘Money laundering,’” according to the Register’s court filing.
On March 13, the governor’s office turned over “numerous documents for examination and copying,” according to the Register. But it refused to provide four emails sent by senior members of Reynolds’ staff.
All four emails have the same subject line: “Media Prep Doc.” None of the emails were sent to the governor, and she was not cc’ed on any of them,
“The communication was intented [sic] to be confidential, and disclosure would inhibit the governor’s ability to receive candid, fulsome, and robust information,” according to the governor’s lawsuit.
A spokesperson for Reynolds made the same argument in a written statement when the lawsuit was filed.
“It is in the public’s interest that governors can receive candid advice from their closest advisors,” Deputy Communications Director Mason Mauro said in the statement.
“By withholding these emails, the [governor and her staff] have kept the people in the dark about Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds’ Congressional testimony and her statement that she could not address claims that Lutheran Services is a ‘money-laundering operation,’” the Register argues in its response.
The Register is asking the court to reject the governor’s injunction request, and to order Reynolds’ and her staff to turn over the four “Media Prep Doc” emails.
Iowa’s Open Record Act, along with state’s Open Meetings Act, was passed in 1967, in an effort to restore and strengthen public confidence in the state’s government. Iowa has one of the broadest open records, or freedom of information, laws in the country. With certain limited exceptions — such as personnel records and documents in ongoing criminal investigation — any Iowan is supposed to be able to request and receive public records for any reason.
“Every person shall have the right to examine and copy a public record and to publish or otherwise disseminate a public record or the information contained in a public record,” according to Iowa Code Chapter 22.
In 2024, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled unanimously that communication by members of the Iowa Legislature regarding the consideration and passage of laws is exempted from the Open Records Act, even though nothing in the act states that.
“The people’s ability to communicate with their elected representatives is vital to the effective exercise of legislative functions,” Justice Dana Oxley wrote in the court’s decision. “The protection of citizens’ role in the legislative process helps ensure the separation of powers and supports finding a legislative privilege that limits the unelected judicial branch’s power to interfere with elected representatives’ performance of official duties.”
The court’s decision came in response to a lawsuit filed by League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) over a bill imposing new voting restrictions that Gov. Reynolds signed into law in 2021. As part of its lawsuit, LULAC attempted to make Republican lawmakers who worked on the bill turn over communications they’d had about it with anyone outside the legislature. LULAC was seeking the documents after allegations surfaced of illegally lobbying of legislators by Heritage Action.
Heritage Action is a national advocacy organization founded by the Heritage Foundation, the Washington D.C.-based think tank now best known for creating Project 2025, the plan the Trump administration has largely followed as it eliminates federal government programs and agencies.
The Iowa Supreme Court has not ruled on whether a governor can invoke executive privilege to avoid complying with the Open Records Act.
