A hole full of malfeasance

A trio of freshmen Republican legislators drafting impeachment measures against the four remaining Iowa Supreme Court justices have the wrong priorities. Kim Pearson announced last month she was drafting the measures joined by Glen Massie and Tom Shaw. New House Speaker Kraig Paulsen has said he won't stand in the way of their effort, although Gov.-elect Terry Branstad says it's the wrong approach. A much better way for the newly elected House members to make a mark would be to offer constructive ideas for plugging a potential $600 million budget hole. Opponents of gay marriage won a huge victory when all three justices up for retention in the Nov. 2 general election were thrown off the bench. That didn't change the court's unanimous 2009 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in Iowa. And there's no guarentee that throwing the rest off and getting a whole new slate of justices would lead to overturning the ruling, either. After all, the justices were doing the job they were appointed for. Just because a large group of voters don't agree with how the justices interpreted the Iowa constitution as it relates to one case doesn't mean they were committing malfeasance, the grounds for which they would be impeached. What does seem like malfeasance is pursuing these impeachment charges.

They threw those bums out!

Iowa's voters were angry and lashing out Nov. 2. They saw a problem --- "activist" judges --- and they did what any angry citizen would do, voted their elected officials out of office. Only, Iowa's judges are not elected. That makes it one of the better systems for putting judges on the bench in the country. That is also what made this a bad situation in which to vote "no" on the three Iowa Supreme Court justices' retention. Now Gov.-elect Terry Branstad will pick three replacements from a slate of nine nominees forwarded to him by a 15-member commission. In other words, he has no control over the group of people from which he will choose. Branstad may find three people among those nominees whom he believes meet his criteria for the Supreme Court. However, Chief Justice Marsha Ternus was appointed by Branstad during a prior term and is now leaving the position because of the court's unanimous vote striking down the Defense of Marriage Act as unconstitutional, making gay marriage legal in Iowa. Opponents of this decision would do better to pursue an amendment to the state's Constitution. That, of course, will take more time and much more political will. Can opponents muster enough voter anger for a long enough time to make that happen? If not, they can always keep campaigning to vote offending judges out.