Anne Hensler Vs. City Of Davenport, 790 N.W.2d 569

Davenport adopted the Parental Responsibility Ordinance 9.56 to curb juvenile delinquency through counseling, notice, and escalating civil penalties on parents.
Definitions assign “Parent,” “Minor,” “Adjudication,” and “Occurrence,” with a second occurrence creating a rebuttable presumption of failed parental control.
Offenses progress from warning to mandatory parenting courses to civil penalties; each violation is a separate municipal infraction.
Anne Hensler’s son Nicholas engaged in delinquent acts (curfew violation, drug-related offenses); Anne received ordinance warnings and attended parenting classes.
Anne sued Davenport under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claiming due process violations; district court found a due process violation and awarded attorney fees.
On appeal, the court severed the unconstitutional presumption, vacated attorney-fee award, and remanded for reconsideration of fees factoring plaintiff’s level of success.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does the ordinance infringe substantive due process by restricting parental rights?	Hensler argues the presumption infringes her fundamental right to parent.	City contends the ordinance modestly informs and sanctions parents without overriding parental authority.	No strict scrutiny; rational-basis review applied to severed provisions.
Does Iowa’s juvenile code preempt the ordinance?	Anne asserts express or implied preemption by juvenile code.	City contends no preemption due to different objectives and non-conflicting aims.	No express or implied preemption found; not preempted.
Is the presumption of failure to exercise reasonable parental control irrational and unconstitutional?	Presumption is arbitrary and irrational, violating due process as to causation and negligence.	Presumption provides a reasonable inference linking delinquency to parental control.	Presumption is arbitrary/irrational; severed from ordinance.
What is the appropriate analysis for attorney fees after severance?	Fees should reflect the prevailing party’s overall success.	Fees may be awarded based on standard § 1988 factors, including success level.	Vacate and remand to reconsider attorney fees considering prevailing-party success.

Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (U.S. 2000) (parental rights are a fundamental liberty interest)
Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982) (fundamental parental rights recognized; standards for state intervention)
Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (U.S. 1925) (parents’ liberty to direct upbringing is fundamental)
Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (U.S. 1923) (liberty to raise children includes curriculum and upbringing rights)
Hernandez-Lopez, 639 N.W.2d 226 (Iowa 2002) (Iowa due process and parental-right framework applied)
State v. Seering, 701 N.W.2d 655 (Iowa 2005) (standard of review and constitutional presumptions in statute analysis)