To Your Honors:

The general election this evening resulted in a vote of "no" regarding the retention of your judicial appointments on the Iowa Supreme Court. On behalf of all those who stand for equality and justice, I am truly sorry that your positions were sacrificed at the hands of out-of-state money, out-of-state interests, and generally misguided individuals. Our unique system of judicial appointment was abused tonight, and you unjustly suffered the effects of this abuse.

Apparently "the people" of Iowa, as they have branded themselves, coopting the term as if to speak on behalf of everyone, have no qualms about publically endorsing political money buying judgeships - or indefensibly taking them away in this case. "Less government intrusion," they champion - this must only apply to issues they handpick; "equality under that law," shouted the Republican candidate for Attorney General. Based on the results of the retention vote, we are forced to conclude that "equality," in their minds, means affording them the opportunity to decide which groups to exclude from certain rights unquestionably granted to others; working to make sure "the government works for the people," unless you are a person whom they have judged to be less deserving.

Although those on whom you may blame your pending unemployment (they also champion job creation, ironically) may have disagreed with your ruling, you were essentially fired for doing your job. "Judicial activism," they screamed - "justices should not make laws." They ignore the fact that you made no law, you simply - and correctly - ruled a previous law unconstitutional.

Article I, section 6 of the Iowa Constitution [1]:

"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."

Apparently, in their minds, that does not conflict with the following:

Iowa marriage statute, 1998; Iowa Code section 595.2(1) [2]

"[O]nly a marriage between a male and a female is valid."

By upholding the former at the expense of the latter, you "overstepped your bounds" in interpreting the Constitution - which, if I am not mistaken, is the job of the judiciary.

What's done is done, and there is no going back (except when it comes to electing a governor). While you may be without employment on December 31, 2010, you are not without support, and you are not without pride. Pride knowing that you did what was right. While your opponents may think your removal is their victory, they neglect the fact that your ruling stands, and will continue to stand: they cannot change the Constitution for another ten years; they have little hope of gaining enough votes in the Iowa General Assembly to pass a law; and they have little hope of holding back the tide of inevitable social progress that, in time, will look back on them only with shame, and will rightfully recognize your historical sacrifice.

Sincerely,
A grateful citizen

[1] Page 19.
[2] Fn. 2, page 8.