News

“In light of today’s decision, we believe that additional modifications to the state’s infectious disease law should be considered,” Schottes said. “Great strides were made through the law’s recent amendment, and we are hopeful that today’s decision—acknowledging the effectiveness of various HIV prevention measures—will fuel the Iowa Legislature’s clear desire to bring the state’s law fully up to date.”

 

"The revised Iowa law may have removed the bizarrely harsh, unscientific penalty that Rhoades initially faced, which slapped him with a 25-year prison sentence for theoretically exposing a partner to HIV without actually transmitting the virus. But an HIV-positive person who knows he’s positive and transmits the virus to a partner “with reckless disregard” still faces five years in prison. And an HIV-positive who exposes the virus to a partner—without actually transmitting it—could still be sent to prison for a full year."

 

"The court’s majority opinion written by Justice David Wiggins concluded intimate contact between Rhoades and the man he had sex with does not establish the necessary factual basis that an exchange of bodily fluid took place or that Rhoades intentionally exposed his partner in a way that could have transmitted HIV."

"In reversing Rhoades’ conviction and sending the case back to the trial court, the court specifically recognized that court rulings involving HIV must be rooted in demonstrated fact, not outdated assumptions about an individual’s ability, let alone intention, to transmit HIV." - CHLP

"The Center for HIV Law and Policy joined the groups to write an amicus brief, Doe v. Holder, in support of providing the man (whose name was redacted) asylum for fear that he could be beaten, raped and killed when he returns to Mexico because of his sexual orientation and HIV status."