Why the Removal of Iowa Judges Hurts Judicial Independence

[defendandprotect]

Why the Removal of Iowa Judges Hurts Judicial Independence


By ADAM COHEN Adam Cohen – Wed Nov 10, 9:15 am ET
It was one of the more striking results from last week's elections: three Iowa Supreme Court justices who joined last year's pro-gay-marriage ruling were voted out of office. Opponents of gay marriage celebrated, confident that a miscarriage of justice had been corrected at the ballot box, but they were wrong. The removal of these three judges - all highly respected jurists, appointed by both Republican and Democratic governors - should send a shiver down the spine of anyone who cares about the American system of justice.

In Iowa, supreme court justices are nominated to the bench by the governor in a merit-based system, but the voters get a chance to decide whether to keep them on for their first term and later for any additional terms. In last week's election, voters opted to remove Chief Justice Marsha Ternus, David Baker and Michael Streit. Their ousters marked the first time that an Iowa Supreme Court justice had been removed since the system was put in place in 1962. (See the top 10 Supreme Court nomination battles.)

The three justices were targeted because last year they joined a unanimous Iowa Supreme Court in ruling that the state constitution required Iowa to recognize same-sex marriages. It was a legal decision based on pure constitutional interpretation.

To opponents of gay marriage, however, the ruling meant war. Anti-gay-marriage activists in Iowa and across the country poured as much as $800,000 into the state to attack Justices Ternus, Baker and Streit - the only ones of the judges up for a retention vote this year - for the ruling. The three justices, not surprisingly, did not raise a similar war chest or respond in kind. (Watch TIME's video "Gay Marriage in the Heartland.")

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/08599203052600;_ylt=Aq__P5dYQop6gJd1QLO047wXIr0F;_ylu=X3oDMTJwbjBpcXFrBGFzc2V0Ay9zL3RpbWUvMDg1OTkyMDMwNTI2MDAEY2NvZGUDcHphZ3IEY3BvcwM1BHBvcwM1BHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDd2h5dGhlcmVtb3Zh

[TxVietVet]

1. We've got the best democracy and justice MONEY CAN BUY.

I listened to glenn beckkk the other night boasting about a lesson he was going to give a book concerning INSURRECTION.

When the majority get tired of a minority of right wing wackjobs ruining our democratic government by the same way Adolf Hitler did, then something may get done.

If not, watch out for the disaster to come to this country.

[Canuckistanian]

2. Voting for judges is a bad idea in the first place

For this very reason.

[rurallib]

3. Insanity at its height

There are still 4 other justices who will be voted on in the next 4 years (1/3 every 2 years = 2 in 2012 and 2 in 2014).
So there could easily be a complete turnover in 4 years.
The decision was UNANIMOUS. It was not based on favoring gay marriage but against discrimination.

As for me I plan to vote against any judge appointed by a republican in the future.

[durkermaker]

4. the process has been in place since 1962

i'm not going to get into how people should have voted on it, that's not my point

but that process has been in place for nearly 50 years, although rarely used

if something is an option on a secret ballet, then the public has the right to make that selection no questions asked (otherwise, what's the point of the secret ballet?)

if a mistake was made, it was made in 1962, by putting it on the ballet in the first place - it was forseeable that it would be used on an unpopular decision - so why hasnt anything been said about it until now?

[RKP5637]

5. At some point Americans need to wake up and quit being pawns of propaganda, but

I have my doubts.

I don't think today many Americans today are bright enough to get past the propaganda. And that sets a highly dangerous direction for this country. So, some will celebrate this happening, but next time it well might happen to them and their interests.

Bigotry doesn't stop at gay marriage. Citizens should be outraged, but many Americans to too F'en lazy to care or think past their selfish self-indulgent, self-centered nose IMO.

[benlurkin]

6. They state whether they are running as (D) or (R)

It is all political. I couldn't believe how easy it was to go on the net and choose who to vote for in Florida, not knowing a thing about judge's voting records, and choose the (D) for my absentee ballot.

[fizzgig]

7. i don't know that the second to last paragraph is entirely accurate

i'm in northern colorado and we booted two of our sitting district court judges and i voted against retaining both of them.

in that case, however, the decision was not based on their performance on the bench but rather their roles more than ten years ago in railroading a young man into a murder conviction. they were both censured a few years ago and the lead detective in the case is now facing perjury charges.