One of the lows of Tuesday's elections was the defeat of three Iowa Supreme Court justices who had ruled in favor of marriage equality in that state last year. Chief Justice Marsha Ternus and Associate Justices Michael Streit and David Baker all lost their retention elections at least in part because the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage set up shop in the state to defeat them. NOM's campaign in Iowa is meant to set a dangerous precedent of punishing judges who apply the law.
According to the Courage Campaign and the Human Rights Campaign, NOM spent $600,000 for a 45-county bus tour and TV ads in Iowa – a significant ad buy for the state's size. NOM ran a mean-spirited, fear-driven campaign, and although the justices were ousted, same-sex marriage remains legal in the state.
One doesn't need a crystal ball to see how this same scenario can play out in judicial retention elections around the country. While the retention process is the voters' opportunity to decide whether a judge should continue to serve, NOM's dishonest tactics were reprehensible. Even before its involvement in Iowa, NOM received a strong warning from Iowa's ethics agency for evading campaign laws, HRC and Courage noted.
So for all the effort and money it boils down to one anti-gay group kicking the justices off the bench, even though the net effect is that same-sex marriage remains legal there. Quite simply, NOM aims to intimidate judges in other jurisdictions and NOM bullied voters in Iowa through fear and prejudice.
The justices issued a joint statement following the poll results:
"It was our great privilege to serve the people of Iowa for many years. Throughout our judicial service we endeavored to serve the people of Iowa by always adhering to the rule of law, making decisions fairly and impartially according to the law, and faithfully upholding the constitution."
More importantly, they asked the state's citizens to support Iowa's system for judicial appointments: "Finally, we hope Iowans will continue to support Iowa's merit selection system for appointing judges. This system helps ensure that judges base their decisions on the law and the Constitution and nothing else. Ultimately, however, the preservation of our state's fair and impartial courts will require more than the integrity and fortitude of individual judges, it will require the steadfast support of the people."
Sadly, it appears that the "steadfast support of the people" was missing during Tuesday's election.
NOM seeks to circumvent campaign disclosure laws so the public can't find out who their contributors are. Both Courage and HRC have tried to bring attention to NOM's activities, including complaints filed with the IRS. NOM remains under investigation by the Maine Ethics Commission for failing to register with the state as a ballot question committee and refusing to disclose its campaign donors to overturn Maine's marriage equality law in 2009. In 2008 NOM was involved in the Proposition 8 fight in California.
NOM hitched itself to Carly Fiorina's Senate campaign, but fortunately the former Hewlett-Packard CEO was defeated by Senator Barbara Boxer Tuesday.
Closer to home, equal rights scored a significant victory with the apparent defeat of Prop 8 attorney Andy Pugno (R), who lost his bid for a state Assembly seat in the Sacramento area. Democrat Dr. Richard Pan appeared headed to victory with nearly 50 percent of the votes, according to unofficial returns. Pugno was a major player in the 2008 Prop 8 campaign and helped craft false claims that children would learn about same-sex marriage in schools and that religious institutions could be punished if they refused to perform same-sex marriages. His defeat is welcome news.
Pan, who was endorsed by Equality California's political action committee, is a solid ally who will stand with the LGBT community. His victory represents a Democratic pickup, as the district had been represented by a Republican.