Iowa Senate passes gun rights constitutional amendment

[livingston]

'Strict scrutiny' sought to protect right to bear arms
DES MOINES — State lawmakers want Iowa voters to decide whether they want to strengthen their gun rights.

Following the House’s lead earlier this week, the Iowa Senate voted Wednesday evening to take the first step toward giving Iowans an opportunity in the 2020 general election to amend the state Constitution to add protections for gun ownership.

Senators voted 34-15 to approve House Joint Resolution 2009, a one-page document that proposes a constitutional amendment providing that the right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed by government.

All 28 Republicans, one independent and five Democrats voted for the resolution, while 15 Democrats opposed it.

“The sovereign state of Iowa affirms and recognizes this right to be a fundamental individual right,” according to the resolution, which the Iowa House approved, 54-42, on Monday. “Any and all restrictions of this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.”

Under Iowa law, resolutions to amend the state Constitution must be passed in the exact same form in both chambers of a General Assembly and be approved in the same form by the next consecutive General Assembly before it can be placed on the ballot.

If approved, the earliest that Iowa voters would likely vote on the language would be in November 2020.

Iowa Senate passes gun rights constitutional amendment

 

[livingston]

Critics of the measure, however, argue Iowa should not join Alabama, Louisiana and Missouri in requiring courts to apply strict scrutiny in cases involving gun laws.

“This is a very high standard,” Zaun said. “What this bill is about — let’s put the cards on the table — is judicial activism.”

Sen. Tony Bisignano, D-Des Moines, sought to amend the resolution to the same language as found in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which does not include the “strict scrutiny” reference.

The resolution as proposed, he said, would make Iowa’s law “one of the most radical” in the nation.

”I’m giving you something we already have and you’re giving us something we don’t know,” he said.

In rejecting Bisignano’s amendment to the resolution on a 28-21 vote, proponents said they want to require that courts apply “strict scrutiny” when considering challenges to gun laws — a change that would prevent future legislatures from approving restrictions that would abridge Iowans’ rights.

 

[Grimscale]

I always thought "strict scrutiny" was mandatory for anything that sought to abridge a Constitutionally protected Right.
Now we need LAWS to say that?

How far we've fallen...

 

[livingston]

I always thought "strict scrutiny" was mandatory for anything that sought to abridge a Constitutionally protected Right.
Now we need LAWS to say that?

How far we've fallen...

NY Safe act ?

 

[BDinPutnam]

Strict scrutiny is the antithesis of judicial activism unless you define judicial activism as making the government demonstrate a clear and immediate or overwhelmingly important reason to infringe on a core civil right.

 

[Robin]

NY Safe act ?

In NY that would be strict Skretny. FUS!
Robin

 

[Dr. Evil]

Very sad that following the law and stating the obvious is refreshing to me.