How Ratings Are Determined

Every candidate is evaluated against the same published standards, using publicly verifiable evidence.

  • The evidenceVotes and legislation, public statements and documented actions, and findings by courts, election authorities or ethics bodies.
  • The standardConduct, not ideology. Intent is not inferred, and silence is never scored as a violation.
  • The sourcesEvery assessment is documented, with full sources listed at the bottom of each scorecard.
Read the full methodology →

How to Read This

Colors reflect constitutional accountability based on publicly verifiable conduct. They are not endorsements or predictions of election outcomes. Ratings reflect the severity, pattern, and context of conduct.

Green — Clear constitutional compliance / restraint
Amber — Mixed, limited, or under-articulated record
Red — Clear or repeated constitutional breach

Iowa · U.S. Senate

IA Constitutional Accountability Scorecard — Summary Table

Contest & Candidate Use of Force Rule of Law Election Integrity
U.S. Senate
Ashley Hinson (R)
Josh Turek (D)

U.S. Senate — Candidate Assessments

Ashley Hinson

Republican Candidate — U.S. Senate

Use of Force: RedRule of Law: AmberElection Integrity: Amber

1. Use of Force — Red

RED

What the Record Shows

  • Condemned the January 6 Capitol violence, urged President Trump to call for its immediate end, and later described the attack as one of the nation's darkest days.
  • Repeatedly opposed House War Powers resolutions seeking to end U.S. hostilities with Iran absent congressional authorization.
  • Strongly supported ICE and expanded immigration enforcement, including increased funding and legislation doubling penalties for assaulting, resisting or impeding ICE personnel.
  • Following fatal federal immigration-enforcement incidents in Minnesota, defended agents' actions while also calling for fact-based investigations and supporting body cameras.
  • Following Charlie Kirk's assassination, characterized political violence as a “left-wing problem,” contrasting with her broader condemnation following January 6.

Why Red

Hinson demonstrated constitutional restraint during January 6, condemning political violence and urging President Trump to call for its immediate end.

Her more recent record shows repeated deference to executive authority: she repeatedly opposed congressional efforts to constrain U.S. hostilities with Iran and has strongly backed federal immigration enforcement, while supporting some transparency and accountability safeguards.

Taken together, the record shows an earlier affirmative stand against political violence followed by a more recent pattern of favoring executive military and law-enforcement authority over congressional and constitutional constraints on government force.

2. Rule of Law & Oversight — Amber

AMBER

What the Record Shows

  • Voted against Trump's second impeachment while saying he “bears responsibility” for January 6, citing process, timing and concerns about further division.
  • Co-sponsored an early January 6 commission proposal but later opposed the bipartisan House commission, arguing it could interfere with ongoing federal investigations; she continued to support investigation and prosecution of those responsible.
  • Supported the concept behind DOJ's Anti-Weaponization Fund while saying government should not be weaponized regardless of the president and calling for congressional oversight of the fund.

Why Amber

Hinson has repeatedly acknowledged the need for accountability while disagreeing with particular mechanisms used to impose it.

She attributed responsibility to Trump while opposing impeachment and supported investigation of January 6 while opposing the House commission ultimately proposed.

The record therefore recognizes accountability and oversight principles but is mixed regarding the institutional mechanisms used to enforce them.

3. Election Integrity — Amber

AMBER

What the Record Shows

  • On January 5, 2021, argued that Congress lacked constitutional authority to reject states' certified electoral votes; after the Capitol attack, voted to certify Biden's victory.
  • Subsequently affirmed that Biden's election was legitimate, although she had previously raised concerns about mail voting, election mismanagement and potentially illegal votes.
  • Voted for and publicly advocated passage of the SAVE Act, arguing that documentary proof-of-citizenship requirements would protect election integrity and prevent noncitizen voting.
  • Opposed the Freedom to Vote Act, describing it as an inappropriate federalization of elections and arguing that it would weaken state voter-ID requirements.

Why Amber

When directly tested in 2021, Hinson rejected congressional authority to overturn state-certified electoral votes, voted for certification and explicitly recognized Biden's election as legitimate.

Her subsequent SAVE Act support raises the voter-access and proportionality concerns addressed by CIU's methodology; her opposition to the Freedom to Vote Act principally reflects a federal-state policy dispute.

Her record therefore combines demonstrated respect for a certified presidential outcome with support for election-security measures raising significant voter-access concerns.

Josh Turek

Democratic Candidate — U.S. Senate

Use of Force: GreenRule of Law: AmberElection Integrity: Amber

1. Use of Force — Green

GREEN

What the Record Shows

  • Argued that military action against Iran requires congressional authorization and warned against another prolonged “forever war.”
  • As an Iowa legislator, became lead Democratic sponsor of bipartisan legislation restricting National Guard combat deployment absent a congressional declaration of war and interstate deployment without the receiving governor's consent.
  • Supports border enforcement and deportation of people who enter illegally and commit crimes while calling for restructuring ICE, protection of basic rights, and greater agent accountability.

Why Green

Turek has repeatedly identified congressional authorization and individual constitutional protections as constraints on military and law-enforcement power.

His National Guard legislation provides demonstrated conduct applying the congressional-war-powers principle rather than relying solely on campaign statements.

His immigration position similarly combines enforcement with explicit protections for individual rights and accountability for government personnel.

2. Rule of Law & Oversight — Amber

AMBER

What the Record Shows

  • Supports institutional reforms including congressional stock-trading restrictions, campaign-finance transparency, Supreme Court ethics requirements, and congressional and judicial term limits.
  • His state legislative record includes campaign-contribution and disclosure measures but limited demonstrated conduct involving judicial independence, executive compliance or independent government oversight.
  • Supports retaining the Senate filibuster as a check on majority power while requiring a traditional talking filibuster.

Why Amber

Turek has articulated consistent accountability principles involving government ethics, campaign-finance transparency, judicial ethics and constraints on concentrated political power.

Much of that record consists of proposed reforms rather than demonstrated conduct involving federal courts, inspectors general, executive compliance or congressional oversight.

The record therefore provides less evidence of how he would apply those principles during a major federal separation-of-powers dispute.

3. Election Integrity — Amber

AMBER

What the Record Shows

  • Turek did not hold public office during the 2020 election or January 6 and had no role in congressional certification; no substantial contemporaneous public record addressing those events was identified.
  • No evidence identified in the reviewed record shows him challenging a certified election result or supporting efforts to overturn one.
  • Supports campaign-finance transparency and restrictions on large-donor influence, including the DISCLOSE Act and restrictions on corporate PAC money.

Why Amber

Turek has not faced a comparable federal test involving certification of a disputed presidential election; the absence of such a test is not adverse evidence.

The record contains no challenge to certified election outcomes but relatively little demonstrated conduct involving election certification, administration or federal voting-access legislation.

His campaign-finance proposals address electoral transparency but do not establish a developed record on CIU's core election-integrity questions.

Sources

Ashley Hinson

  1. U.S. House of Representatives, Office of the Clerk. (May 14, 2026). Roll Call 170 — H. Con. Res. 75, directing removal of U.S. forces from hostilities against Iran.
  2. U.S. House of Representatives, Office of the Clerk. (June 3, 2026). Roll Call 199 — H. Con. Res. 86, directing removal of U.S. forces from hostilities with Iran.
  3. U.S. House of Representatives, Office of the Clerk. (July 23, 2026). Roll Call 282 — H. Con. Res. 89, directing removal of U.S. forces from hostilities with Iran.
  4. U.S. House of Representatives, Office of the Clerk. (September 15, 2026). Member Votes — War Powers, 119th Congress, 2nd Session.
  5. Associated Press. (September 16, 2026). Iowa Republicans in battleground House races vote to halt Trump's ability to continue the Iran war.
  6. KCRG. (January 26, 2026). Iowa lawmakers call for transparent investigation into Minneapolis shooting.
  7. Iowa's News Now. (February 24, 2026). Iowa clergy gives letter to Rep. Hinson and launches petition over immigration policies.
  8. Radio Iowa. (September 24, 2025). Hinson bill doubles penalties for attacking ICE agents.
  9. FactCheck.org. (October 2, 2025). What We Know About Political Violence in America.
  10. Center for Strategic and International Studies. (September 25, 2025). Left-Wing Terrorism and Political Violence in the United States: What the Data Tells Us.
  11. Washington Post. (May 19, 2021). How House Republicans voted on a commission to investigate the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.
  12. Office of Rep. Ashley Hinson. (April 10, 2025). Hinson: Illegal Immigrants Should Never Vote in U.S. Elections.
  13. U.S. House of Representatives, Office of the Clerk. (April 10, 2025). House Roll Call Votes — SAVE Act.
  14. U.S. House Committee on House Administration. (October 8, 2021). Davis Visits Iowa, Utah as Part of Faith in Elections Project.

Josh Turek

  1. Little Village. (March 2, 2026). “God bless the president” for attacking Iran: Iowa Senators, Senate candidates react to Operation Epic Fury.
  2. Josh Turek for Iowa. (2026). Pushing for Change — Policy Platform.
  3. Josh Turek for Iowa. (February 27, 2026). Josh Turek Unveils Policy Platform and Announces “Pushing for Change” Tour.
  4. Iowa Capital Dispatch. (April 8, 2026). Zach Wahls criticizes Josh Turek for ‘dark money’ support, immigration bill vote.
  5. Iowa Capital Dispatch. (May 5, 2026). Democratic U.S. Senate candidates debate immigration votes, outside money.
  6. Josh Turek for Iowa. (January 24, 2026). Josh Turek Releases Video Statement on ICE Activity in Minnesota.
  7. Josh Turek for Iowa. (September 8, 2026). Statement: Josh Turek Slams Ashley Hinson for Saying Iowans Aren't Concerned About the War in Iran.
  8. Iowa Public Radio. (September 18, 2026). Democrats aim to flip Iowa's U.S. Senate seat in an increasingly competitive race.
  9. Iowa Independent. (July 2026). Josh Turek focuses on healthcare and bipartisanship in run for Iowa U.S. Senate seat.
  10. The Stated Record. (2026). Josh Turek — candidate record.
  11. The Stated Record. (2026). Iowa U.S. Senate — Government Accountability.