Skip to comments.Iowa conservatives renew bid to defeat judge who backs gay marriage
Posted on 08/12/2012 4:15:24 AM PDT by scottjewellEdited on 08/12/2012 7:57:12 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
WAUKEE, Iowa ó A group of Iowa conservatives announced Saturday they will campaign to defeat Iowa Supreme Court Justice David Wiggins, who was part of the courtís unanimous 2009 decision to allow gay marriage in the states.
But Wiggins, unlike three Iowa high court judges rejected by voters in 2010, is backed by a group of activists fighting their own campaign to defend him.
(Excerpt) Read more at suntimes.com ...
Was this ever put on the ballot so the folks couyld vote yteah or nay to gay marriage?
If so I am then assuming the citizens rejectwed it and this Judge overturned the vote. Is that right?
If it was put to a vote what were the results of that vote?
Here is some info on same sex marriage in the state of Iowa:
Same-sex marriage in the U.S. state of Iowa became legal on April 3, 2009.
Iowa’s first dealings with same-sex marriage came in 1998, after recent court cases on same-sex unions, starting in Hawaii, found that denying the right to marry to same-sex couples was incompatible with the Equal Protection Clause of the state constitutions of most states. Iowa legislators hurried to pass a local Defense of Marriage Act to prohibit marriage between gay and lesbian couples to avoid a similar court challenge.
In 2005, Lambda Legal filed a lawsuit on behalf of six Polk County same-sex couples and their children who were denied marriage licenses in Iowa, arguing that this denial violated the liberty and equal protection clauses in the state constitution. In 2007, the Polk County District Court ruled in favor of the couples, prompting the county to appeal to the Iowa Supreme Court.
On April 3, 2009, the Iowa Supreme Court unanimously upheld the District Court’s ruling holding that there was no important governmental interest in denying citizens marriage licenses based on their sexual orientation. Licenses were originally to be available 21 days after the ruling, on April 24, but the availability of licenses was subsequently postponed until April 27 due to a Furlough day.
...A state constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage has been proposed several times in the state legislature in the wake of the judicial rulings. To amend the constitution, two consecutive sessions of the legislature will need to approve the amendment, after which it would be placed on the ballot for final approval by the Iowa electorate.
An amendment was first proposed in 2008 but did not pass. The Legislature did not vote on a constitutional amendment in 2009, and Senate Majority Leader Michael Gronstal said he would not allow one to be brought to the floor in 2010.
In a joint press release with House Speaker Pat Murphy on April 3, 2009, Gronstal welcomed the court’s decision, saying “When all is said and done, we believe the only lasting question about todays events will be why it took us so long. It is a tough question to answer because treating everyone fairly is really a matter of Iowa common sense and Iowa common decency. Iowa has always been a leader in the area of civil rights.”
Democratic leaders of Iowa Senate and Iowa House of Representatives during the 2009-2010 legislative session opposed a vote on an amendment.
there was no important governmental interest in denying citizens marriage licenses . . .
Meaning the blackrobes disagreed with the Legislature and the Governor, meaning a few blackrobes dressed up their opinion as a constitutional right and hope the people do not notice the crime.
These demigods strike at the heart of liberty, our right to have laws made by our reps.
It is a shame that impeachment, conviction and removal has developed such a bad rap and is so rarely used. Our once republic would benefit from the political scalps of a dozen so judges every year.
“...a few blackrobes dressed up their opinion as a constitutional right and hope the people do not notice the crime.”
Is it not possible for the people of the State to gather enough signatures to have the question put on the ballot?
All you say is true.
“It is a shame that impeachment, conviction and removal has developed such a bad rap and is so rarely used. Our once republic would benefit from the political scalps of a dozen so judges every year.”
Is among the best proof I have seen putting the truth to the claim we get the government we deserve.
I wonder the same thing; it seems that they ought to have created a referendum to be put on the ballot this November. I cannot imagine why they couldn’t get the signatures if they tried.
But according to this piece (in a gay rights advocacy mag), in 2010 the attempt failed in the state House and in the Senate: (pushing any chances to 2014):
In Iowa, judges are non-partisan (at least on the ballot), and when their term is up, it is simply a question on the ballot, "Should Judge Joe Schmoe be retained?" Iowa has not had a Supreme Court justice not retained since something like 1968--and he had a drunk driving arrest or something like that.
In 2009 or so, the Iowa Supreme Court unanimously approved same sex marriage. In 2010, 3 of those Supremes were up for retention. And all 3 of them got no votes at around 58-60%, they should not be retained. Since that had not happened since 1968, that was a large shot across the bow of same sex marriage fans. There really wasn't even that big of a campaign for or against those judges. But people knew about it, and shot them down.
In 2012, one of those judges is up for retention. Because of 2010, there is now an effort on both sides, to retain, and not to retain. Despite anything else good or bad that judge has done, his retention is simply becoming a proxy vote on same sex marriage. That is the only issue on his competency and retention. I expect he will not be retained, like his 3 counterparts in 2010. The rest of them will come up for retention votes in future even numbered years.
Thanks for your excellent analysis!
Why do women, who as mothers should know better, always so easily fall for the gay propaganda?
Such as Judge Susan Bolton in Arizona, who is on a personal vendetta to block any and all anti-illegal alien laws the AZ legislature passes and Governor signs. She is a disgrace.
Michael Kiernan, former chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party and a delegate to the party’s national convention, has been arrested on suspicion of driving while drunk.
The Des Moines Register reports that Kiernan was arrested around 1:30 a.m. Friday. A Des Moines police officer says Kiernan was wearing only boxer shorts at the time, and a breath test indicated his blood alcohol level at .126, well over the .08 driving limit
Wow, some news there - thanks for the tip off! :-)