Sioux City Journal

Judge Robert Hanson should be impeached

Posted: Sunday, September 23, 2007

CORRECTIONVILLE, Iowa -- Last week, Everyday America started an online petition at www.everydayamerica.com to impeach Judge Robert Hanson for his decision to declare parts of Iowa’s marriage law unconstitutional.

The opinion of Judge Hanson in this case is a great example of why the people and the Legislature must put a stop to this now. Judge Hanson’s opinion includes many disturbing things, but one statement speaks to the heart of the problem with the judiciary today. This statement is taken from a previous court decision and in the legal world is called a precedent. This precedent says, “Our Constitution is not merely tied to tradition, but recognizes the changing nature of society.” This statement is absolutely false and is a horrible, unconstitutional judicial precedent.

The Constitution relies heavily upon tradition as well as history and does not change with the nature of society because human nature never changes. The Constitution ONLY changes when a constitutional amendment passes, not at the whim of a judge. It is up to the Legislature to pass laws concerning society. This precedent is a perfect example of how government (the judiciary in this case) gets out of control and subverts the will of the Constitution as well as the people. Too many in the judiciary bend and mold the words and meaning of our founding document so it is no longer recognizable.

We must start tossing out judges who take the law into their own hands. The power to impeach a judge is in the Iowa Constitution for a reason. It is up to Iowa legislators to check the power of the judicial branch. If they do not, those legislators are guilty of negligence, as well. -- Jason Hamann, co-founder, Everyday America

Story Comments

DB wrote on Oct 1, 2007 4:29 PM:

" JG: please tell me you don't honestly believe inalienable civil rights should be subject to the whim of a fickle electorate. That's not very libertarian of you. Which rights of yours would you like to put up for a vote? "

JG wrote on Sep 29, 2007 7:16 PM:

" DB, you put a black robe on some ridiculous ambulance chaser and suddenly he's infallible and has the authority to redefine marriage? Let's introduce a bill in the state legislature approving gay marriage, have a full and open debate, then vote up and down on it. We were intended to be a self-governing people and that's the way to do it. "

DB wrote on Sep 29, 2007 12:15 AM:

" JG: trouble is, hizzoner hasn't abused his power, he has just used it properly to uphold freedom in the face of bigotry. "

Who cares wrote on Sep 28, 2007 1:26 PM:

" Why do all of you care so much about this? How does it really impact you in your everyday lives? We all should be the best people we can be and not argue over something for which total agreement will never be reached. How does a civil union between gay individuals devalue or undermine traditional marriages? It doesn't. If nothing else, a civil union defines property rights, insurance benefits, ect. What is that hurting? I'll continue to raise my children the way I believe is right and go on with my daily life as I always have regardless of whether gay marriage or civil unions are allowed. "

JG wrote on Sep 27, 2007 6:24 PM:

" Dana, I said anthropological taboo, not religious taboo, meaning that it's unnatural--and most people know it, even if they can't articulate it. I'm even prepared to argue against gay marriage on libertarian grounds, i.e., the state, acting on its on, doesn't have the competence to decide that homosexual activity is the equal of conjugal love. And, religion. Why certainly it would play a role in this--Western civilization being Christian for nearly two millenia. "