Iowa's Chief Justice defends Varnum decision

CEDAR RAPIDS – Iowa Supreme Court Chief Justice Marsha Ternus told students and others at Coe College Tuesday the “state stands at the crossroads to decide what kind of courts they will have.”

Ternus said she wasn't there to debate the Varnum decision but would like to review it. She encouraged everybody to read the decision.

“There is a misunderstanding of what the Varnum decision was about,” she said.

The court found the statute defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman violated equal protection laws.

Coe's Pre-Law Club and Political Science Club sponsored the event Tuesday, which was open to the public.

Ternus talked about the “rule of law” in explaining the controversy in the judiciary and the retention election. She said the rule of law is the process of governing by laws that are applied fairly and uniformly to all persons.

“It creates predictibility and consistency,” Ternus said. “The same rules are applied in the same manner to everyone… and it protects the rights of everyone.”

The courts decide whether a legislative law is unconstitutional, Ternus said. Judicial review of laws is nothing new and it's not legislating from the bench, as the some critics have said when the courts reviewed the Varnum v Brien case. The court is there to protect of the will of the people, she said.

“The court's not overstepping its role- it's fulfilling its role, ” she said.

The court fulfilled its role by upholding constitutionally protected rights in the Varnum decision.

Ternus read some criticisms about the courts which sounded similar to today's critics but it was regarding segregation in 1954 in a decision called Brown v. Board of Education. There were three justices from the deep South, who knew it would make them unwelcome at home but they stood by the decision.

Complaints about courts' decisions aren't uncommon, especially if they involve social and political issues, but judges must follow the constitution with “no exceptions,” Ternus said.

Ternus explained the merit selection system, which focuses on professional qualities, instead of politics and money. She asked the group to base their retention vote on merit not politics to keep the courts fair and impartial.

Ternus also took some questions from the students and others. Most of the questions regarded retention. Some said they didn't think there was enough information available to make vote on retention.

She said she agreed somewhat but referred them the Iowa Bar Association's survey of judges of justices and bio information on each of the justices up for retention on the Iowa Courts web site.

Ternus said the issue was discussed at a recent conference because there are some states like Colorado who have better, more sophisticated evaluations but “those cost money.”