Court dismisses former Iowa legislator’s lawsuit against the state

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought by a physician and former state senator who sued two Iowa licensing boards after an alleged investigation into his treatment of COVID-19 patients.

Dr. David Hartsuch, an emergency medicine physician and former Republican state senator, sued both the Iowa Board of Medicine and Iowa Board of Pharmacy, alleging retaliation for his exercise of his First Amendment right to free speech, abuse of process, interference with his professional practice, selective enforcement and violations of his due process rights.

Hartsuch, a proponent of using ivermectin to treat COVID-19, alleged that in December 2021, Kent Nebel, then the executive director of the Board of Medicine, indicated complaints had been filed against 17 Iowa doctors for spreading false or misleading information about COVID-19.

A few weeks later, the lawsuit claims, Hartsuch received a letter from the board indicating he was under investigation for complaints alleging the “spreading of COVID disinformation.”

According to state records, the Board of Pharmacy had referred the matter to the Board of Medicine after a patient of Hartsuch’s complained that his pharmacist refused to fill the physician’s prescription for ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19.

Court records show the Board of Medicine’s investigation of Hartsuch focused on three allegations: that he had acted in an unprofessional manner when dealing with a Walgreen’s pharmacist, that he spread misleading information about COVID-19 and its treatment, and that he was prescribing drugs for off-label uses not approved by the FDA to treat COVID-19.

Ivermectin is used in humans to treat infections caused by parasitic worms. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel has recommended ivermectin not be used for treating COVID-19 outside of clinical trials.

In October 2022, the Board of Medicine wrapped up its investigation of Hartsuch and sent him a confidential warning letter reprimanding him for raising his voice to the pharmacist, while indicating it might reexamine the matter at some point in the future.

Two months later, Hartsuch initiated a state-court lawsuit against the two state licensing boards, asking a judge to order the Board of Medicine to expunge its warning letter, which he said had placed him “in fear of communicating with any pharmacist at all.”

In July 2023, the Board of Medicine issued Hartsuch a second letter, rescinding its October 2022 letter. By that point, Hartsuch argued in court, the damage was done — stating he had lost his malpractice coverage, his job at AllMed Inc., and his hospital privileges.

In a series of rulings, the district court found that it lacked jurisdiction over the matter, noting that the board’s action against Hartsuch was “merely a warning letter” that was eventually rescinded, meaning there was no further relief the court could grant.

Hartsuch appealed, but in October 2025, the Iowa Court of Appeals upheld the district court’s ruling, setting the stage for another lawsuit, filed in federal court, alleging the boards’ actions were unreasonable, violated Hartsuch’s rights and destroyed his livelihood.

That lawsuit named as defendants the two licensing boards and 21 individuals, most of whom were board members or part of the boards’ administrative staff. It alleged the defendants “effectively blacklisted” him through their actions and infringed on his First Amendment right to comment on “matters of public concern, including medical opinions, scientific debate, and public health issues relating to COVID-19.”

Recently, U.S. District Judge Stephen H. Locher dismissed Hartsuch’s lawsuit, ruling it had been filed after the two-year statute of limitations had expired and that it had improperly sought damages from individuals who have immunity when acting in their official, quasi-judicial capacity.

“Hartsuch knew enough by July 2023, at the latest, to start the running of the statute of limitations,” Locher stated in his decision.

“He no longer had a timely claim in February 2026” when the lawsuit was filed, Locher added. “Even if Hartsuch’s claims were timely, they would fail on absolute immunity grounds anyway insofar as he seeks damages from defendants in their individual capacities.”

Locher noted that the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has held in similar cases that licensing board members are entitled to absolute immunity for their work in investigating and adjudicating disciplinary complaints.

Hartsuch’s attorney, Kyle Savage of West Des Moines, declined to comment on the judge’s ruling or the possibility of an appeal.

Hartsuch served as a state senator from Bettendorf from 2007-2010 and ran unsuccessfully for U.S. House in 2008.