Iowa House subcommittee on Tuesday advanced legislation that would prohibit carbon dioxide pipeline operators from using eminent domain to seize private land for carbon sequestration projects.

Known as the House Study Bill 507, the legislation represents the latest move in a multiyear legislative battle over property rights and the state’s ethanol industry. 

Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, the bill’s manager, argued that the legislation is necessary to safeguard constitutional protections for landowners.

“Economic development is of profound importance, but it does not trump fundamentally constitutional rights,” Holt said, adding that the use of government power to acquire land for a private economic development project “is not constitutional.”

The Bill specifically targets projects like the proposed Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline, which intends to transport captured carbon from ethanol plants in Iowa and neighboring states to underground storage sites. 

While proponents say the pipeline is vital for Iowa’s renewable fuel industry to access low-carbon markets, opponents argue the use of eminent domain for a private venture is an overreach of government authority.

Jake Ketzner, representing Summit Carbon Solutions, testified that the bill would "kill" the project and eliminate Iowa’s competitive edge. Labor union representatives also opposed the bill, citing potential job losses for trade workers.

The proposal faces an uncertain future in the Iowa Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mike Klimesh, R-Spillville, said he prefers an alternative approach that would allow pipeline operators to deviate from approved routes to find passage with willing landowners rather than a total ban on eminent domain. 

Gov. Kim Reynolds vetoed a similar pipeline-related bill last year, citing vague legal standards.

Despite the hurdles, dozens of landowners gathered at the Capitol on Tuesday to lobby for the ban. Peg Rasmussen, a Montgomery County landowner, said she believes the House remains "solidly behind" their cause.

The bill now moves to the full House Judiciary Committee for further consideration.