In the legislature we often speak of what we have accomplished or what we’re planning to do or what we’re working on – and that is good! But I think people should know what are the bad bills that have been introduced in the legislature this past session and that we have stopped from becoming law. This helps us further understand why having a Republican majority in the legislature is so important. So don’t forget those down-ballot candidates!
Abortion a “Fundamental Right” in the Iowa Constitution
This bill, SJR 2001, would amend the Iowa Constitution to provide that abortion is a “fundamental individual right” and shall not be infringed unless it meets the highest legal standard in court. No restriction shall apply to an abortion that “in the professional judgment of an attending health care professional, is medically indicated to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual.” This proposed amendment would forbid any restriction on abortion that a doctor declares is needed to maintain a woman’s “mental health.” There would virtually be no restrictions! It would allow abortion up to the moment of live birth! This would give abortion the same level of protection as the freedom of religion, the freedom of speech, the right to keep and bear arms, etc.
Medically Assisted Suicide
This bill, SF 2101, would create a procedure for an adult patient who is mentally capable, is a resident of the state, and is “terminally ill”, no matter the age or level of disability, to undertake medically assisted suicide.
Even though fraud, mistreatment and abuse are prohibited, this can easily degenerate into families pressuring elderly family members into assuming the “responsibility” of a “duty to die” especially when the care for the elderly member is financially or emotionally costly and the elderly member feels like he doesn’t want to be a “burden” to others. There can also be faking a family member’s request for suicide medication.
Assisted suicide gives insurance companies and governments the ability to save money by pushing lethal drugs that are less expensive than treatment. This is not an irrational fear; it has already happened in Oregon and California.
Among patients in Oregon and Washington, the inability to control pain is not among the top-five reasons they requested suicide drugs.
Opening the door to legalization of assisted suicide can lead down a slippery slope where we no longer care for human beings if they cannot contribute economic or social value to us or society. This utilitarian view of human life dishonors the high view of human life which recognizes that we are created in God’s image. Assisted suicide is an idea borne out of false compassion; it doesn’t treat the real problems, which are mental, emotional, or spiritual. We should not abandon people in their hour of need to suicide.
Those who promote assisted suicide also promote abortion on demand, also reflective of a low view of human life, all of which weakens the moral fabric of society.
“Red Flag” Law
This bill, SF 2245, would establish an “emergency extreme risk protective order” that could be obtained, without notice to the person and without a court hearing, against a person who “presents a significant danger to the person’s self or others by possessing, shipping, transporting, or receiving firearms.” If the court finds “good cause” supporting the claim, it shall issue an emergency extreme risk protective order. Under this order, the court shall order the person to immediately surrender to the named law enforcement agency all firearms possessed by the person within 48 hours.
This bill would allow seizure of firearms on a “preponderance of the evidence” standard – the low standard of proof in ordinary civil litigation.
Even worse, it would allow temporary seizure if a judge is persuaded that the allegations made amount to “good cause,” without any opportunity for the other person to respond.
We should note that this would not be for a crime someone has committed but rather for a crime or suicide someone MIGHT commit. In our American system of criminal law, a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. A red flag law would presume a person guilty until proven innocent. I don’t believe anyone wants to go down that road. The idea that a person could lose their constitutional rights without being convicted of a crime or an impartial trial rendering a decision is really a dangerous one.
There is much potential for abuse by family members who would maliciously or mistakenly petition the court for someone’s 2nd Amendment rights to be revoked. Judges, rightly concerned about violence in society involving guns, could easily be led to violate an innocent person’s 2nd Amendment rights. Under this law, people can lose the constitutional right to armed self-defense if a judge thinks they probably pose a “significant danger” to themselves or others.
Prohibiting “Conversion Therapy”
This bill, SF 2249, would forbid a mental health professional to counsel a minor on sexual orientation or “gender identity” – unless it’s to “affirm” the minor’s orientation or identity.
This bill is a targeted restriction on speech: the speech between counselors and their clients. It singles out a specific message—that an individual can experience change to their sexual orientation or live consistent with his or her biological sex—for censorship, while permitting opposing viewpoints to be discussed in counseling conversations.
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2020 that such content- and viewpoint-based restrictions on speech are unconstitutional. The court said, “People have intense moral, religious, and spiritual views about these matters—on all sides. And that is exactly why the First Amendment does not allow communities to determine how their neighbors may be counseled about matters of sexual orientation or gender.”
Counseling censorship is wrong based on principles of freedom of religion, freedom of speech, the professional code of ethics for practitioners, and equal protection. Counselors should be able to have open and client-directed conversations with their clients about sexuality and identity. They should not be subject to content-and-viewpoint discrimination and censorship.
Numerous faiths teach that individuals can experience personal change—change to opposite-sex attraction or change to feelings of being born the wrong sex. And many clients seek professional help to conform their lives to these religious teachings. Counseling censorship laws demonstrate open hostility towards these religious teachings.
Prohibition of Magazines over 15 Rounds
This bill, SF 2080, prohibits the sale or transfer of magazines over 15 rounds. It would be an aggravated misdemeanor to sell or transfer such a magazine, punishable by up to two years imprisonment. Magazines of over 15 rounds are standard equipment for firearms commonly possessed and used by Iowans. This bill would criminalize ordinary, routine conduct protected by the Second Amendment. In addition, it lets criminals know what limits a citizen has to protect himself, therefore limiting citizens’ ability to respond to threats using over 15 rounds.
Right to Contraception a Fundamental Right
This bill, SF 2135, declares that “the right to contraception is a fundamental right,” and it provides (among other things) that “a person has a statutory right under this chapter to obtain contraceptives and to engage in contraception.” The bill also provides that this right to contraception overrides other rights including the right to free exercise of religion: the right to contraception shall not be limited by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
This apparently means that a person’s “fundamental right to contraception” can compel another person to provide contraception who is unwilling to do so. A person has a right to buy anything legally allowed, but it’s not a “fundamental” right. A “fundamental right” would mean that the other person is required to offer it for sale. That person should not be required to offer it for sale. It should be no different than buying groceries or gas in the sense of being a right. Given that it is legally allowed, a person is not obligated to offer contraception for sale to another person.
Judges on Your Ballot
Each election I am always asked about the judges that will be on the ballot. Citizens want to know how to find out information about them to help them decide how to vote on the judges. The Iowa Right to Life and the Pulse Life Advocates have put together an excellent document that is succinct, concise, and easy to follow giving great information about the judges that will be up for retention on our ballot. You can find it at: https://pulseforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/voter-guide.pdf
