Here we go again.
The Iowa Supreme Court ruled today that a state law defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman was unconstitutional and struck language saying as much from the Iowa code.
If the Hawkeye State has an initiative/referendum process for amending its constitution as does the Golden State, this represents yet another setback for gay marriage. It will galvanize opponents of the institution. My guess is that given the number of social conservatives in Iowa, they could succeed in gathering the requisite signatures within a month.
If more than 52% of Californians voted to overturn as similar decision, expect an even larger majority of Iowans to do the same.
As have all state supreme court decisions mandating the state to recognize same-sex marriages, this one will lead to a popular backlash. When state supreme courts leave this matter to the states, support for popular initiative defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman increases. When they mandate gay marriage, they galvanize the opposition leading to a backlash at the ballot box.
FROM THE COMMENTS: Pink Elephant writes:
Amendments to the iowa consittuion require the proposed language to pass both houses in two separate sessions before it even gets on the ballot. Although it will galvanize opponents to same-sex marraige elsewhere, same-sex marriage in Iowa is safe for a while.
Given the state’s constitution, that sounds about right.