In a motion filed in Polk County District Court on Wednesday, attorneys for Winneshiek County Sheriff Dan Marx called the effort to cut off all state funds to Winneshiek County by Gov. Kim Reynolds and Attorney General Brenna Bird in response to a Facebook post by Marx “nothing more than thought policing.” Marx asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit Bird filed against him and the county on March 27.
On Feb. 4, Sheriff Marx published a post on the Winneshiek County Sheriff’s Department’s Facebook page, in which he said he wanted to address “a fair number of concerns” he heard from residents about “recent news, chatter and happenings surrounding federal agents from three letter agencies including ICE, FBI and others.”
“I share your mistrust and many of your concerns with the legitimacy of how these federal agents conduct business,” the sheriff wrote. Marx then explained that he and his deputies will assist ICE and other federal law enforcement agencies if requested when those agencies’ “actions and paperwork are within constitutional parameters.” But if “their actions or paperwork are not within constitutional parameters (such as non-judicially vetted ‘detainers,’ which are very different than warrants and are simply an unconstitutional ‘request’ from ICE or other three letter federal agency to arrest or hold someone), then we will make every effort to block, interfere and interrupt their actions from moving forward.”
The sheriff encouraged people to contact his office “should you find yourself or others in an encounter with any federal agents. We are always willing to assist with verifying credentials and the legitimacy of any paperwork federal agents should have to make certain your rights are not being abused.”
One day after Marx published his statement about “three letter agencies including ICE,” Gov. Reynolds responded to it by sending a letter to the sheriff and the Winneshiek Board of Supervisors accusing Marx of violating Chapter 27A of Iowa Code with his Facebook post.
“Understand that a sheriff and a county can become ineligible to receive any state funds if the local entity is found to have intentionally violated the provisions of chapter 27A,” Reynolds warned.
The governor also said, “Based on the sheriff’s posted policy this letter shall be treated as a complaint I am filing with the attorney general pursuant to Iowa Code 27A.” She did not address Sheriff Marx’s points about ICE’s behavior or concerns regarding the possibility of unconstitutional detentions.
Chapter 27A requires every “local entity” in the state to cooperate with federal immigration agents, keep anyone for whom ICE issues a detainer order in custody until ICE removes them, and to “not adopt or enforce a policy or take any other action under which the local entity prohibits or discourages the enforcement of immigration laws.” (A “local entity” is defined as “the governing body of a city or county… [including] an officer or employee of a local entity or a division, department, or other body.”)
The section of Iowa Code was created in 2018 by SF 481, which Reynolds signed into law in April of that year. According to the governor and the Republicans in the Iowa Legislature who passed the bill, it was needed to address the problem of “sanctuary cities” in Iowa, even though there were no sanctuary cities in Iowa. Of course, 2018 was an election year, and Reynolds and other Republicans running for office that year appealed to fears about immigrants as part of their campaigns.
Chapter 27A allows anyone to file a complaint that a municipality is failing to fully cooperate with federal immigration agents. Either the Iowa Attorney General’s office or a county attorney’s office would then have to investigate the complaint. If it is determined that the municipality isn’t complying with the law, it will lose all state funds until a district court judge determines it is in compliance.
Acting on Reynolds’ complaint, AG Bird opened an investigation into Marx and his department. Predictably, Bird ended up agreeing with Reynolds, and on March 27, Bird initiated a lawsuit against Marx and Winnesheik County by filing a petition in Polk County District Court.
“The Sheriff posted on Facebook a message rife with legal and factual errors that discouraged enforcing immigration laws in violation of chapter 27A,” the petition asserted. “The Governor, recognizing that the post violated the law, filed a complaint with the Attorney General’s Office. And finding a violation, the Attorney General now sues to enforce the law.”
The petition only addressed the Facebook post, because the report the attorney general’s office published at the conclusion of its investigation of Marx found the sheriff and his department had cooperated with ICE every time the agency had requested Marx and his deputies do something.
According to the report, since Chapter 27A was enacted, the Winneshiek County Sheriff’s Office had received 21 detainer requests from ICE and complied with all of them. The office’s formal written policy on immigration law enforcement is in accordance with state law. No problem was alleged to have occurred other than the Facebook post.
Marx cooperated with the investigation, sending a statement clarifying his position to the AG’s office, and stating that he would continue to cooperate with ICE as long as their requests were constitutional. That wasn’t enough for Bird’s office.
“First, the Sheriff must delete the offending Facebook post,” the report stated. “Second, to correct the discouragement he must make a new post.” The report then provided a 219-word-long version of what the new post should say, warning the sheriff that his post must “substantially” use the same language. The AG’s template requires the sheriff to “disavow” his earlier Facebook post, and say, “It was wrong.”
“This post serves as formal revocation of my earlier February 4, 2025 post,” the AG’s template instructs the sheriff to say.
The report, which is dated March 26, said that Marx had until 5 p.m. that same day to delete his original Facebook post and then publish a Facebook post with the sort of language the attorney general wants, or “the Attorney General will file an enforcement action as required by chapter 27A.” (Bold type in the original.)
Shortly after noon on March 27, Marx’s Feb. 4 post was removed from the Winneshiek County Sheriff’s Office Facebook page. And at 12:14 p.m., a new post was published on the page addressing the complaint filed by Gov. Reynolds and the AG Office’s report.
“Upon the conclusion of the investigation, to prevent litigation and potential loss of state funding, the Attorney General’s Office required us to take down the original post and replace Sheriff Marx’s original statement with a statement the Attorney General’s Office had scripted,” the new post said. “The language of the post proposed by the Attorney General was not acceptable to the County. To demonstrate good faith, we chose to take the post down, and for the sake of transparency to the people of Winneshiek County, we are posting, below, our February 14, 2025, response to the AG’s request for information.”
“Sheriff Marx’s response outlines how Winneshiek County has been in compliance with Iowa Code Chapter 27A while protecting the constitutional rights of our citizens. The response also confirms the Sheriff’s Office commitment to remain in compliance with State and Federal immigration laws while staying true to the Constitutional protections afforded the citizens of Winneshiek County.”
By the time the new Facebook post was published, the AG’s office had already filed its petition asking the district court to take cut off state funding to Winneshiek County, arguing Marx had violated Chapter 27A with his Feb. 4 Facebook post.
The response to the petition Marx’s attorneys filed on Wednesday argues the AG’s petition is faulty in several ways. It says that because Marx is an official in Winneshiek County, and his allegedly unlawful act — writing the Facebook post — occurred in Winneshiek County, Bird should have sued in Winneshiek, not Polk County. It also makes a technical argument that as sheriff, Marx is not subject to Chapter 27A as it is written. It disputes the allegation that Marx violated the law by pointing out that the AG’s petition contains no evidence that anyone was discouraged from cooperating with ICE because of his Facebook post. It also argues that even if the Facebook post was somehow a violation, it has been deleted and Chapter 27A only permits enforcement actions to correct an ongoing violation, not to punish past behavior.
“Finally, although the Iowa Attorney General seeks a specifically phrased apology, there is no statutory support to compel Sheriff Marx to post the Attorney General and Governor’s proposed retraction language,” the filing states.
“[Bird’s] petition is nothing more than thought policing,” it continues “At its core, Sheriff Marx posted his understanding of his constitutional duties on Facebook. Not only did the State take issue with that position but now threatens to withhold needed public funding from the people of Winneshiek County because Sheriff Marx does not agree with State-drafted retraction.”
The attorney general’s office said it will not be releasing any statements about Marx asking the court to dismiss the case.
In a separate filing in Polk County District Court, Winnesheik County is asking the court to remove it from the lawsuit, arguing that under Chapter 27A, Bird can only sue the board of supervisors and not the county as whole.
The complaint the governor filed over the Facebook post is the only time Chapter 27A has been invoked since it was added to Iowa Code in 2018.
Since the lawsuit against Marx and Winneshiek County was filed, Gov. Reynolds has announced she will not run for reelection in 2026, and Attorney General Bird has said she is considering running for governor next year.
