Iowa official: Judiciary is 'under attack'

Iowa's judicial retention system is 'under attack,' the state's court administrator says, and its future may depend upon those who want to keep the courts insulated from political influences.

'I certainly don't think that Iowans really want to see a judicial branch that is overrun by campaigns and how much money people raise,' court administrator David Boyd said.

But, Boyd said, that might be the outcome as Iowa for Freedom, a conservative grassroots group formed by Sioux City businessman Bob Vander Plaats, mounts an unprecedented effort to oust three Iowa Supreme Court justices in Nov. 2 balloting.

The three justices up for retention this year - Chief Justice Marsha Ternus and Justices Michael Streit and David Baker - were part of the unanimous April 2009 decision that struck down a state law defining marriage as solely between one man and one woman.

Those who support the justices' ouster say that decision was an example of increased, unacceptable judicial activism.

The justices say they are seeking to maintain their independence by steering clear of the public discourse.

'We're not forming campaign committees. We're not going to become politicians,' Ternus said. Ternus broke her silence at last week's review of Iowa's child-welfare system. She added the justices will not be engaging in fundraising or other activities, even though court rules allow a certain involvement.

Given that position, however, Ternus said she hopes the retention vote is not a one-sided debate.

'I hope that people who understand the system and the role of the court will speak out more and more and I believe that's beginning to happen,' she said.

Vander Plaats, a Sioux City businessman who finished second to former Gov. Terry Branstad in the June 8 GOP gubernatorial primary, said the retention vote has become a line in the sand to halt judicial activism run amok.

'I believe this election to unseat these three justices may be, if not one of the most, the most important campaign and election in the entire country,' he said. 'If they will do this with marriage, every other one of your freedoms is up for grabs.' Same-sex marriage opponents have been pushing for an amendment to the Iowa Constitution that defines marriage as only between one man and one woman.

However, Vander Plaats said a recent federal court ruling that overturned a similar effort in California threw that possibility into question. Chuck Hurley, a former state lawmaker who leads the Iowa Family Policy Center, said a backlash against judicial activism has been building for years, but the California ruling 'just threw gas on the fire.' 'People now get it that judges aren't our robed masters, they are in fact public servants,' he said. 'The sea change is the 'we the people' that's being recovered. It's not new in America; it's being renewed in America. Taxpayers decide if we rehire our employees. We're the employer.' However, Boyd said the challenge to Iowa's judicial independence runs deeper than the outcome of one decision.

'Judges have to decide cases based on the law, based on the facts, based on the Iowa Constitution, based on the United States Constitution, and they need to be uninhibited to follow their oath, to support the constitution and to make deci­sions as they see them and not have to make a decision under fear that, oh, I'll be on the ballot in one year or in two years or whatever it might be, and let that influence the decision that they make,' he said.