Gay marriage coming to Iowa?

[sketerpot]

This is one of the most under-reported cases out there. The Iowa supreme court recently heard a case that will decide whether or not the state constitution guarantees marriage rights to same-sex couples. And it's looking good so far; the justices were really grilling the lawyer arguing against gay marriage, with questions like "How is this any different from interracial marriage?" and "What you're saying sounds inconsistent with [insert several precedents here]." (Paraphrased.)

Article and video of the arguments.

I'm very hopeful; I think it's likely that the court will rule in favor of gay marriage, and then it would be impossible to repeal until November 2012 at the earliest. And that would take a constitutional amendment, which is unlikely to make it through the house and senate.

Wouldn't it be wild as hell if Iowa became the next state to legalize gay marriage?

[Pint0 Xtreme]

Iowa doesn't strike me as particularly liberal in regards to social issues. Assuming that the court rules that banning same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, what is to stop right-wing groups from launching a drive to put a constitutional amendment to remove those rights? With Prop 8 passing, I have no doubt that's exactly what they will do in that situation.

[Alyrium Denryle]

This is one of the most under-reported cases out there. The Iowa supreme court recently heard a case that will decide whether or not the state constitution guarantees marriage rights to same-sex couples. And it's looking good so far; the justices were really grilling the lawyer arguing against gay marriage, with questions like "How is this any different from interracial marriage?" and "What you're saying sounds inconsistent with [insert several precedents here]." (Paraphrased.)

Article and video of the arguments.

I'm very hopeful; I think it's likely that the court will rule in favor of gay marriage, and then it would be impossible to repeal until November 2012 at the earliest. And that would take a constitutional amendment, which is unlikely to make it through the house and senate.

Wouldn't it be wild as hell if Iowa became the next state to legalize gay marriage?

"How proposed--submission. SECTION 1. Any amendment or amendments to this constitution may be proposed in either house of the general assembly; and if the same shall be agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each of the two houses, such proposed amendment shall be entered on their journals, with the yeas and nays taken thereon, and referred to the legislature to be chosen at the next general election, and shall be published, as provided by law, for three months previous to the time of making such choice; and if, in the general assembly so next chosen as aforesaid, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be agreed to, by a majority of all the members elected to each house, then it shall be the duty of the general assembly to submit such proposed amendment or amendments to the people, in such manner, and at such time as the general assembly shall provide; and if the people shall approve and ratify such amendment or amendments, by a majority of the electors qualified to vote for members of the general assembly, voting thereon, such amendment or amendments shall become a part of the constitution of this state. "

The state legislature has to approve it twice, once before, and once after a general election. Then in the next general election it is referred to a citizen vote.

Good luck fundies!

[Pablo Sanchez]

Iowa doesn't strike me as particularly liberal in regards to social issues. Assuming that the court rules that banning same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, what is to stop right-wing groups from launching a drive to put a constitutional amendment to remove those rights? With Prop 8 passing, I have no doubt that's exactly what they will do in that situation.

If I'm reading the Iowa State Constitution correctly it would have to wait to be voted on until the next general election (2010 for the Iowa legislature). Then it would have to get a majority in both houses, then it would be voted on by the citizens of Iowa with a simple majority winning. I think a gay marriage ban could pass in this fashion.

But the relevant part of the Iowa constitution is this:
"All laws of a general nature shall have a uniform operation; the general assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens."

So the issue of such an amendment would be, is Iowa allowed to make its constitution grossly contradict itself? I'm not sure how this would work.

[Drooling Iguana]

I think the timing is key on this. The courts legalised gay marriage in California just a few months before an election in which a constitutional amendment overturning the decision could be introduced in the ballot, which was likely a major factor in why Proposition 8 passed. If it's legalised in Iowa right now or in the not-too-distant future it'll be a few years before it can be overturned, during which time gays being married will become an increasingly normal aspect of everyday life, making it harder to rally people against it. It could still be overturned in 2010 or 2012 (I'm not able to decipher enough of the legalese in Alyrium Denryle's post to work out how quickly a constitutional amendment can be passed in Iowa,) especially given the state's conservative leanings, but there are still a few factors working in gay marriage's favour here that weren't in play in California.

Question: If they do end up legalising gay marriage in Iowa and DOMA is overturned, would homosexual couples wishing to marry be able to make a road trip to Iowa (or any other state with legal gay marriage,) get married, then return to their home states and retain their status as a married couple?

[Alyrium Denryle]

If I'm reading the Iowa State Constitution correctly it would have to wait to be voted on until the next general election (2010 for the Iowa legislature). Then it would have to get a majority in both houses, then it would be voted on by the citizens of Iowa with a simple majority winning. I think a gay marriage ban could pass in this fashion.

You are not. Here is what has to happen

The amendment must be drafted in the legislature.

It must pass both houses with a 50% majority vote.

It must then wait until the next general election (2010)

It must then be reintroduced, and once again pass a 50% majority vote in both houses

It then gets referred to the people in the subsequent election (2012)

Question: If they do end up legalising gay marriage in Iowa and DOMA is overturned, would homosexual couples wishing to marry be able to make a road trip to Iowa (or any other state with legal gay marriage,) get married, then return to their home states and retain their status as a married couple?

Yes

[CmdrWilkens]

If I'm reading the Iowa State Constitution correctly it would have to wait to be voted on until the next general election (2010 for the Iowa legislature). Then it would have to get a majority in both houses, then it would be voted on by the citizens of Iowa with a simple majority winning. I think a gay marriage ban could pass in this fashion.

You are not. Here is what has to happen

The amendment must be drafted in the legislature.

It must pass both houses with a 50% majority vote.

It must then wait until the next general election (2010)

It must then be reintroduced, and once again pass a 50% majority vote in both houses

It then gets referred to the people in the subsequent election (2012)

Not exactly "then it shall be the duty of the general assembly to submit such proposed amendment or amendments to the people, in such manner, and at such time as the general assembly shall provide;"

They can hold a special referrendum election the day after voting on the matter in the first day of the session after the 2010 election. Now that said its unlikely they would do anything prior to the December 2011/January 2012 Caucus from a pure logistics standpoint but they could do it as early as the week of 17 January 2011.

[Alyrium Denryle]

If I'm reading the Iowa State Constitution correctly it would have to wait to be voted on until the next general election (2010 for the Iowa legislature). Then it would have to get a majority in both houses, then it would be voted on by the citizens of Iowa with a simple majority winning. I think a gay marriage ban could pass in this fashion.

You are not. Here is what has to happen

The amendment must be drafted in the legislature.

It must pass both houses with a 50% majority vote.

It must then wait until the next general election (2010)

It must then be reintroduced, and once again pass a 50% majority vote in both houses

It then gets referred to the people in the subsequent election (2012)

Not exactly "then it shall be the duty of the general assembly to submit such proposed amendment or amendments to the people, in such manner, and at such time as the general assembly shall provide;"

They can hold a special referrendum election the day after voting on the matter in the first day of the session after the 2010 election. Now that said its unlikely they would do anything prior to the December 2011/January 2012 Caucus from a pure logistics standpoint but they could do it as early as the week of 17 January 2011.

Ah. I did not catch that part, I stand corrected. Still, that is a good long while, and it may not get through the legislature if the Gay Machine is in any way competent in Iowa (not that I have high hopes for that given the track record of our political apparatus)

[rapidsquirrel]

I have the distinct feeling that if gay marriage was left up to voters of Iowa, it's not going to pass and I happen to live in one of the more liberal parts of the state.

[Ted C]

Question: If they do end up legalising gay marriage in Iowa and DOMA is overturned, would homosexual couples wishing to marry be able to make a road trip to Iowa (or any other state with legal gay marriage,) get married, then return to their home states and retain their status as a married couple?

Yes

That depends on the state. The idiot faction here in Tennessee, for instance, included in the language of the amendment that it will not recognize out-of-state marriages that do not fit the state's definition of marriage.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Question: If they do end up legalising gay marriage in Iowa and DOMA is overturned, would homosexual couples wishing to marry be able to make a road trip to Iowa (or any other state with legal gay marriage,) get married, then return to their home states and retain their status as a married couple?

Yes

That depends on the state. The idiot faction here in Tennessee, for instance, included in the language of the amendment that it will not recognize out-of-state marriages that do not fit the state's definition of marriage.

They wont have a choice. Their state law would be in blatant violation of the federal constitution. It would be exactly the same as them saying they didnt recognize CA drivers licenses.

[Ted C]

That depends on the state. The idiot faction here in Tennessee, for instance, included in the language of the amendment that it will not recognize out-of-state marriages that do not fit the state's definition of marriage.

They wont have a choice. Their state law would be in blatant violation of the federal constitution. It would be exactly the same as them saying they didnt recognize CA drivers licenses.

Hmmm... I guess it's there so they'll already be set if the Federal rules go their way.

[CmdrWilkens]

That depends on the state. The idiot faction here in Tennessee, for instance, included in the language of the amendment that it will not recognize out-of-state marriages that do not fit the state's definition of marriage.

They wont have a choice. Their state law would be in blatant violation of the federal constitution. It would be exactly the same as them saying they didnt recognize CA drivers licenses.

Hmmm... I guess it's there so they'll already be set if the Federal rules go their way.

Right, their current language is designed to take advantage of DOMA by stipulating a non-recognition of marriages that would not be valid in the state (oddly enough this would also apply to situations of marriage to avoid statutory rape where the allowance for what is a valid marraige that avoids the charge is different from state to state). If DOMA is overturned or declared unconstitutional then Tenessee's statute would be declared unconstitutional under the full faith and credit clause. At the same time Iowa coudl do what Massachucettes did, that is at least one member seeking to be married in the state must be a resident of the state (if I recal the statute correctly).