Tweet
The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) won a hard-fought victory in Iowa today, getting three of the judges who ruled for marriage equality in Iowa booted from that state’s Supreme Court:
In Iowa, which declared Iowa’s marriage ban unconstitutional under the state’s constitution in 2009, the National Organization for Marriage got one of its first electoral victories this year. The judicial retention elections appear to have resulted in the replacement of all three justices up for a vote this year.
Here, as of 1:15 a.m. and with 1615 out of 1774 precincts reporting, are the Iowa Secretary of State’s election results:
Supreme Court Justice – David L. Baker
Yes Non-Partisan 402392 45.69%
No Non-Partisan 478297 54.31%Supreme Court Justice – Michael J. Streit
Yes Non-Partisan 402113 45.57%
No Non-Partisan 480307 54.43%Supreme Court Justice – Marsha Ternus
Yes Non-Partisan 397094 44.95%
No Non-Partisan 486407 55.05%
Statements from HRC and Courage Campaign leadership:
Human Rights Campaign president Joe Solmonese said in a statement about the loss, “By their own admission, NOM’s Iowa strategy was about sending a warning shot to judges nationwide. NOM and its secret donors will continue to target judges around the country if they rule in favor of marriage equality and will foster an anti-gay, hostile environment in the process.”
Meanwhile, the Courage Campaign’s Rick Jacobs said in the same statement, “Having seen its extremist agenda increasingly rejected by the courts and the American people, it is telling that NOM has now settled on a strategy of evading tax and election laws and trying to intimidate judges. These are the tactics one might expect from Al Capone, not a credible political organization.”
How these judges will be replaced, and by whom, is not immediately clear. The incumbent governor, Democrat Chet Culver, is leaving office and a Republican, Terry Branstand, will replace him.
10 Comments
Watch them make an effort in California now that they’ve proved their concept in a much smaller state.
Why do you think the CA Supreme Court upheld Prop Hate and ent it to the Feds? They can’t do anything to the Fed judge Walker Vaughn except try to impeach him, which they may do now that the R’s are in charge….a well as to Virginia Phillips as to DADT. Maybe now the Log Cabin Republicans will see the inconsitancy of their position.
Not even. IIRC, Walker is retiring.
Can’t touch him.
I cannot tell you how depressing this is. What may make it even worse is that this failure of retention may filter down through the Appeal and District Courts in Iowa. Decapitating the entire judiciary and threatening Iowa’s generally non-partisan Merit-based system of judicial appointments.
…just in time for a Republican governor of course.
True, gay marriage won’t be legal much longer in Iowa. Not sure if they’ll try to undo Massachusetts too, but I’m sure NAM feels emboldened at this point. But this is the country we live in folks and there’s not much we can do about it. The gay couples I know are pretty much resigned to it. They’ve been together for years (25 in one case!) and due to state and workplace policies they do get some good benefits. It’s a sad night, but I think at this point we all need to work just to ensure it doesn’t get even worse.
Almost a bright spot: last year Hawaii’s overwhelmingly Democratic legislature passed civil unions legislation. The Neanderthal Republican governor [Linda Lingle] vetoed it.
Now, with Abercrombie as governor, I’m thinking the civil unions bill will be fast-tracked to his desk.
There’s still a surprising amount of resistance here to civil unions, because the churches are so strong, the various ethnic groups are so religious and conservative, but there was little change in the make-up of the Hawaiian legislature, so I’m betting the bill will sail through.
Terry Brandstadt is a moderate republican that appears to support the judges.
They can try to impeach Phillips, but they do not have enough votes to do anything against her.
The LCR is not the problem- it’s GOProud.
OK, this is not going to be the walk in the park that NOM thinks it is. Getting rid of these judges does nothing in the long run with regards to overturning marriage equality in Iowa. They still cannot get it on the ballot until 2014, and even then, they may not have enough votes to get the measure through two legislatures. Then it creates a legal quagmire.
Add to that, the fact that the LGBT Community is changing and we aren’t exactly going as quietly as we have been.
Bridgttepl- Please explain since I don’t know how it was set up in Iowa. I assume the governor appoints replacements for the 3 ousted judges? If so, couldn’t some activist bring a legal challenge to the existing law into the court system and, if it rises to the Supreme Court, couldn’t those new judges strike down the existing law before 2014?