Iowa Supreme Court should have final say on steel wheels case

By The Globe-Gazette, Mason City

We believe there is only one place for it to come to a conclusion: The Iowa Supreme Court.

That's why we're backing a call by the attorney for Mitchell County Mennonites for the high court in Iowa to rule on the county's ban of the use of steel-wheeled vehicles.

At the center of this controversy is young Matthew Zimmerman of rural Osage. The teenager was cited for allegedly driving a steel-wheeled tractor on a county road in January. The fine: $10 and $63.50 in court costs.

Not much, monetarily. But so important religiously to the family.

It appealed, citing violation of First Amendment rights. The county's law, they said, interfered with its religious practice of using steel-wheeled vehicles.

Mitchell County, on the other hand, claimed those vehicles were causing considerable damage and passed the ordinance against their use in 2009.

Judge Bryan McKinley in October said the ordinance is neutral and did not discriminate against one group, although he called it a burden on the Mennonites in trying to transport goods or work the fields.

Mason City attorney Colin Murphy, on behalf of Zimmerman and in effect the entire Mennonite order in the county, is taking the case on what he hopes will be the road to the Iowa Supreme Court.

Murphy claims there is a “substantial constitutional question” as to the validity of the ordinance against steel wheels “regardless of whether they cause any damage to the surface.”

He also claims “superficial cosmetic damage to the paved surface ... does not impair the present use of the road (and) is being advanced as an overriding governmental interest to restrict a bona fide religious practice.”

Plus, he said, the county ordinance burdens the Mennonites because they're unable to use paved roads to reach farms, transport produce to market and “share farming equipment among other members with distant tracts of lands.”

All are intriguing points, just as the entire case has been intriguing at every twist and turn.

The question is, what will stand as the law of the land?

Will it be the Mennonites' claim that their methods of farming are protected by the Constitution?

Or will it be an Iowa county's right to protect its property - protection it says is impossible because of damage caused by the steel wheels used by the Mennonites.

This indeed is a question that deserves resolution by the state's highest court. We hope the court takes it on.

A decision from on high seems to be the only way for this controversy to be settled - not to everyone's satisfaction, but settled nonetheless.