In 2012, the Iowa Legislature passed a revised version of a law to protect farmers against illegal intrusion for the purpose of gathering data and recording videos on behalf of animal rights organizations.  The law was the subject of litigation in re Animal Legal Defense Fund v Reynolds. 

The Iowa law comprised two parts establishing a misdemeanor on the basis of "agricultural production facility fraud" through obtaining access to a farm or plant by false pretenses referred to as the Access Provision.  A crime would also be committed if an individual made a false statement in an employment application referred to as the Employment Provision.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit reversed a lower court decision that the law violated First Amendment rights in entirety.  The 8th Circuit however sustained the Access Provision.  The court citing precedent concluded that "intentionally false speech undertaken to accomplish a legally cognizable harm may be proscribed without violating the First Amendment.  The court found that the Employment Provision was unconstitutional since it was broader in scope than the Access Provision and penalized a prospective employee in making a false statement with respect to the offer of employment.

According to Attorney Duane Morris of Gill, Jennings & Every LLP, the result of the appeal provides a greater level of security for livestock farmers.  In Iowa it will be illegal to gain access to a farm in order to expose alleged mistreatment of herds or flocks based on the Access Provision.  If the legislature amends the law to proscribe only false statements that are material to a hiring decision, both the Access and Employment Provisions will be constitutional.  The 8th Circuit decision applies only to Iowa, but legislatures of other states may wish to amend laws to remove the question of First Amendment rights of potential intruders and reestablish security to owners of flocks and herds. The Iowa decision now represents a precedent and will be cited in future challenges to state laws protecting farmers from intrusion.