Iowa is one of the few states left that have constitutions that don’t address RKBA. I don’t know why, other than probably the idea the right would ever be challenged didn’t even enter their thoughts.
Iowa Legislature approves putting pro-gun constitutional amendment in front of voters
The Iowa Legislature has approved a proposed pro-gun amendment to the Iowa Constitution for the second time, paving the way for it to appear on Iowans’ ballots in 2022.
The Senate approved the resolution Thursday afternoon in a 29-18 vote along party lines after about two hours of debate. Hours later, the House voted 58-41, also along party lines, to pass the same measure. Both chambers are controlled by Republicans. Every Republican present voted in favor of the amendment, while every Democrat was opposed.
Thursday’s vote means that after years of work by Republican lawmakers — and a mistake by the Iowa Secretary of State’s office in 2018 that required them to start over — Iowans will have a chance to vote for or against the proposal themselves next year.
The language of the proposed amendment states: “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The sovereign state of Iowa affirms and recognizes this right to be a fundamental individual right. Any and all restrictions of this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.”
Republicans have argued for the measure for years, saying Iowa is one of only six states without protections in its constitution for the right to keep and bear arms.
“The right to someone’s own life and the pursuit of their own happiness, their own destiny — life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness — cannot be separated from the right to defend their life, hence the fundamental right to keep and bear arms in our Second Amendment,” said Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, the measure’s House sponsor.
Democrats say Republicans are misleading Iowans when they say the amendment is equivalent to the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and that the “strict scrutiny” language would allow the courts to overturn gun restrictions on the books.
Senate Democrats attempted to change the wording of the resolution from what they described as extreme language. They sought to exactly match the wording of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
“This could be a noncontroversial bill in a bipartisan fashion to do something that has been overlooked for over a century. But no, the majority party chooses division. They choose extremism,” said Sen. Tony Bisignano, D-Des Moines.
Republican lawmakers rejected Democrats’ proposed changes. They said the extra state protection is necessary to defend gun rights from judges who aren’t supportive of the Second Amendment.
“We have found that liberal judges are willing to just take away your right to keep and bear arms, the individual right. This is an attempt to do everything we can to make that harder to do,” said Sen. Julian Garrett, R-Indianola.
Sen. Kevin Kinney, D-Oxford, a former lieutenant in the Johnson County Sheriff’s Office, said he worried the strict scrutiny language could allow laws like required background checks to be struck down.
“Not many of you have ever had to sit and look down the barrel of a gun. I have, on a number of occasions,” Kinney said. “When you are placing strict scrutiny into the Constitution, you’re going to be diminishing our laws that are on the books. To me, this is going to make law enforcement more dangerous.”
House Democrats: Background checks, permit requirements could be struck down
House Democrats argued against the amendment in a wide-ranging debate that referenced mass shootings, suicide, court decisions around the country and the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. They said they fear the constitutional amendment would negate Iowa laws such as permit-to-carry requirements and bans on gun ownership by felons.
“Nobody in this room can guarantee what a judge is going to do,” said Rep. Wes Breckenridge, D-Newton, a retired police officer.
During debate, Holt did not answer Democrats’ questions about which laws he believes meet the strict scrutiny test.
“If current or future laws are narrowly tailored to advance a compelling government interest regarding this fundamental individual right, they will be safe. If they do not fit that category, they will not be safe and they should not be on the books,” Holt said.
As in the Senate, House Democrats tried unsuccessfully to get Republicans to swap the amendment’s language for the Second Amendment. When that failed, they tried to add language making clear that Iowa’s background check laws would still be protected.
Rep. Jennifer Konfrst, D-Windsor Heights, told a story about an abusive former boyfriend who hit her, followed her and said he wanted to kill her.
“Thank God he didn’t have a gun,” she said. “I’m not being dramatic when I say I don’t know if he would have tried to kill me or not. Background checks keep men like this from having a gun.”
Holt said federal background check laws wouldn’t be affected by the amendment and, as long as state background check laws meet the strict scrutiny standard, they will be upheld.
Democrats also said they were frustrated that Republicans chose constitutional amendments on guns and abortion as the first measures to pass out of the chamber, rather than focusing on the COVID-19 pandemic.
“We have done abortion and guns,” said Rep. Brian Meyer, D-Des Moines. “We are three weeks into the session going into week four and we have done abortion and guns. Zero on COVID relief. Zero. We should be ashamed of ourselves.”
Holt said he disagrees with the idea that the Legislature has better things to do with its time.
“We can walk and chew gum at the same time. We have a lot of different pieces of legislation moving, and this is one of the most important,” Holt said.
Amendment adds heat, ‘millions of dollars’ to Iowa’s 2022 election
Amendments to the Iowa Constitution must be passed in two consecutive two-year sessions of the Iowa Legislature before they are placed on Iowans’ ballots for a statewide up or down vote.
The Iowa Legislature previously passed the same proposed amendment in 2019, so its passage Thursday means it will appear on the 2022 general election ballot.
Iowans would have had the chance to vote on the measure in 2020 if not for an error by the Iowa Secretary of State’s office, which failed to publish notifications in newspapers around the state in 2018 announcing that the Legislature had begun the process of amending the Constitution. The mistake caused lawmakers to begin the process again in 2019.
The measure will add a wrinkle to the 2022 election, when Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds will be seeking reelection. U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley’s seat will also be on the ballot, although Grassley, 87, has not said whether he will run for another term.
The resolution’s Senate sponsor, Sen. Brad Zaun, R-Urbandale, previewed that campaign in his closing remarks on Thursday.
“I can promise you that there will be a lot of money spent for passing this constitutional (amendment) in November, leading up to November 2022 and against,” he said. “Millions of dollars probably.”