{"id":14430,"date":"2009-04-03T10:48:15","date_gmt":"2009-04-03T16:48:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/?p=14430"},"modified":"2014-11-05T15:13:36","modified_gmt":"2014-11-05T22:13:36","slug":"go-iowa-go","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/2009\/04\/03\/go-iowa-go.html","title":{"rendered":"Go, Iowa, go!"},"content":{"rendered":"

Whodathunk a solidly Midwestern state would be the next one whose High Court would rule banning gay marriage is unconstitutional? But Iowa’s done it<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n

The Iowa Supreme Court says the state’s same-sex marriage ban violates the constitutional rights of gay and lesbian couples, making it the third state where gay marriage is legal.<\/p>\n

In a unanimous ruling issued Friday, the court upheld a 2007 Polk County District Court judge’s ruling that the law violated the state constitution.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

That was a unanimous <\/em>ruling<\/a>, folks.<\/p>\n

I haven’t found a breakdown of the makeup of the Supreme Court of Iowa, but I can’t imagine it’s a hotbed of liberality and libertinism. And they basically saw the matter as a straightforward violation of the state’s “equal protection under the law” constitutional provision: <\/p>\n

\n

[C]ivil marriage must be judged under our constitutional standards of equal protection and not under religious doctrines or the religious views of individuals. This approach does not disrespect or denigrate the religious views of many Iowans who may strongly believe in marriage as a dual-gender union, but considers, as we must, only the constitutional rights of all people, as expressed by the promise of equal protection for all. We are not permitted to do less and would damage our constitution immeasurably by trying to do more.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

I find it interesting, as well, that the key argument before them was that the lower court judge’s ruling was incorrect, but that it for the legislature to make such a decision, not a judge. The Supremes noted that it was, in fact, their job<\/a> to determine whether<\/p>\n

\n

… a law enacted by the legislative branch and enforced by the executive branch violates the Iowa Constitution. The court reaffirmed that a statute inconsistent with the Iowa Constitution must be declared void, even though it may be supported by strong and deep-seated traditional beliefs and popular opinion.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Yup.<\/p>\n

The opinion<\/a> is actually a very good summary of the arguments against gay marriage, and their polite but clear demolition by the court. It’s worth reading.<\/p>\n

Of course, that doesn’t mean the Iowa legislature (which in 1998 passed the law explicitly defining marriage as one-man-one-woman) will let the ruling stand. Though it seems unlikely<\/a> they’re going to get a new constitutional amendment passed any time soon.<\/p>\n

\n

The timing of the decision could be awkward for state lawmakers who are on track to end the legislative session in coming weeks.<\/p>\n

Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal (D-Council Bluffs), told reporters that it’s “exceedingly unlikely” the Legislature would deal with the gay marriage issue this year, regardless of the court’s ruling. “This is the final step in a lengthy legal proceedings,” said Gronstal. “We’re going to wait and see that decision and review it before we take any action.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Which could set up a California-like situation, where gay couples wed before the legislature (or popular initiative) can act to stop them.<\/p>\n

Stay tuned.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

(via Doyce and Ginny)<\/p>\n

<\/small><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Whodathunk a solidly Midwestern state would be the next one whose High Court would rule banning gay marriage is unconstitutional? But Iowa’s done it. The Iowa Supreme Court says the state’s same-sex marriage ban violates the constitutional rights of gay and lesbian couples, making it the third state where gay marriage is legal. In a … Continue reading “Go, Iowa, go!”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[25,718,9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14430","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gay-stuff","category-marriage-equality","category-politics-law"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":49740,"url":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/2015\/03\/04\/alabama-supreme-court-longs-for-the-50s-the-1850s.html","url_meta":{"origin":14430,"position":0},"title":"Alabama Supreme Court longs for the 50s. The 1850s","author":"***Dave","date":"Wed 4-Mar-15 6:26am","format":false,"excerpt":"\"Federal court rulings? We don't need no stinking federal court rulings!\" Because state nullification worked so well last time.And for such (pardon me) bullshit rationales:The Alabama court ruled state bans on gay marriage aren't discriminatory since they ban both men and women from marrying people of the same sex, and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "~PlusPosts"","block_context":{"text":"~PlusPosts","link":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/category\/blogging\/plusposts"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":39251,"url":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/2013\/10\/20\/new-jersey-supreme-court-on-gay-marriage.html","url_meta":{"origin":14430,"position":1},"title":"New Jersey Supreme Court on gay marriage","author":"***Dave","date":"Sun 20-Oct-13 1:44pm","format":false,"excerpt":"Here are some excerpts from the ruling.What's interesting is something of a cascade effect. The court did not find the state had identified any harm from gay marriage, but it did find harm done to the state's plaintiffs -- including a variety of state benefits, but, more notably, denial of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "~PlusPosts"","block_context":{"text":"~PlusPosts","link":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/category\/blogging\/plusposts"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":26237,"url":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/2012\/02\/10\/brian-s-brown-is-a-dolt-marriage-outlaw-frenzy-edition.html","url_meta":{"origin":14430,"position":2},"title":"Brian S. Brown is a Dolt (Marriage Outlaw Frenzy! edition)","author":"***Dave","date":"Fri 10-Feb-12 7:10am","format":false,"excerpt":"Hi, Brian. \u00a0You don't know me, I shouldn't think, but I know you're the \u00a0Executive Director of the Education Fund for the National Organization of Marriage (NOM). \u00a0Now, I didn't expect that you'd take the Ninth Circuit ruling in the Proposition 8 case in a particularly positive fashion. \u00a0But I\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Dolts"","block_context":{"text":"Dolts","link":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/category\/dolts"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/02\/brian-s-brown.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":12385,"url":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/2008\/05\/16\/more_on_the_california_ga.html","url_meta":{"origin":14430,"position":3},"title":"More on the California gay marriage ruling","author":"***Dave","date":"Fri 16-May-08 8:50am","format":false,"excerpt":"Couple of good articles in the LA Times about the state supreme court decision yesterday that overturned the legal ban on gay marriage. It's an instant presidential campaign issue, for...","rel":"","context":"In "LGBTQ &c"","block_context":{"text":"LGBTQ &c","link":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/category\/gay-stuff"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":6608,"url":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/2004\/08\/12\/rule_of_law.html","url_meta":{"origin":14430,"position":4},"title":"Rule of Law","author":"***Dave","date":"Thu 12-Aug-04 2:53pm","format":false,"excerpt":"The California Supreme Court has ruled that Mayor Gavin Newsom of San Francisco had overstepped his Constitutional bounds in issuing marriage licenses to gay couples, and, 5-2, voided the 4,000-odd...","rel":"","context":"In "LGBTQ &c"","block_context":{"text":"LGBTQ &c","link":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/category\/gay-stuff"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":14471,"url":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/2009\/04\/07\/this-about-says-it-all-about-the-iowa-decision.html","url_meta":{"origin":14430,"position":5},"title":"This about says it all about the Iowa decision","author":"***Dave","date":"Tue 7-Apr-09 10:43pm","format":false,"excerpt":"Iowa Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal (D) was approached by Senate Minority Leader Paul McKinley (R) about sponsoring a bill to kick off the process to amend the Iowa state constitution to overturn that nasssssty state supreme court decision (which found that banning gay marriage violated, duh,\u00a0the state's equal protection\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "LGBTQ &c"","block_context":{"text":"LGBTQ &c","link":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/category\/gay-stuff"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14430","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14430"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14430\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":46663,"href":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14430\/revisions\/46663"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14430"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14430"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14430"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}