Friday, November 11, 2022

Iowa Passes Right to Keep and Bear Arms Amendment by 65% to 35%


Iowa was one of only six states without a provision in the state constitution to offer protection of the right to keep and bear arms. 

In the last part of a long, complicated process to amend the Iowa State Constitution, Iowa voters approved of Iowa Amendment 1, Right to Keep and Bear Arms (2022) by nearly a 2-1 margin.  From ballotpedia

A "yes" vote supported adding
a right to own and bear firearms to the Iowa Constitution and require
strict scrutiny for any alleged violations of the right brought before a
court.

A "no" vote opposed adding
a right to own and bear firearms to the Iowa Constitution and require
strict scrutiny for any alleged violations of the right brought before a
court.

With 98.55% of the vote counted, the election result makes clear the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has passed. From the desmoinesregister.com

Yes votes  65.1%

No votes  34.9%

The percentage of victory for the amendment is several percentage point higher than was predicted in a poll done a few days before the election. In that poll, 58% of Iowa likely voters planned to vote for the amendment,  37% planned to vote against the amendment, and 6% were not sure. 

When the votes were counted, all those predicted by the poll voted for the amendment, including all those who were undecided, and about two percent of those who said they would vote against the amendment.

Iowa continues the trend of large percentages of state voters approving of constitutional amendments protecting the right to keep and bear arms. The actual wording of the Iowa amendment is this:

Right to keep and bear arms. Sec. 1A. 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.

Several previous states have added right to keep and bear arms amendments to their state constitutions, or strengthened existing protections of the right to keep and bear arms.  

1998 Wisconsin: 74% voted in favor of a right to keep and bear arms amendment

2010 Kansas: 88% voted in favor of a right to keep and bear arms amendment

2012 Louisiana: 74% voted in favor of a right to keep and bear arms amendment

2014 Alabama: 72%  voted in favor of a right to keep and bear arms amendment

2014 Missouri: 61% voted in favor of a strengthened right to keep and bear arms amendment

The Iowa process was long and difficult. In Iowa, a constitutional amendment has to pass both chambers of the legislature. 

Then, a scheduled election has to take place. 

Then the constitutional amendment has to pass both chambers of the legislature, again.

Then, the amendment has to be passed in a general referendum, which is what happened in this election.

In Iowa, the process was delayed because the Secretary of State forgot to publish the amendment as required by law. Because of this, the amendment had to be passed by both chambers of the legislature a third time, in 2021. 

Now that the measure has passed, Iowans are protected by both the Second Amendment at the national level and by the recently passed measure.

In the Bruen decision by the United States Supreme Court, the "levels of scrutiny" were struck down as irrelevant. 

Thus the Second Amendment provides a higher level of protection than even the Iowa measure, which holds the courts to "strict scrutiny". 

 When given a choice, voters consistently vote to protect their right to keep and bear arms.

The five states which do not have a state constitutional protection for the right to keep and bear arms are: California, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, and New York.

©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch





1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I voted Yes for the Iowa amendment. The amendment language should have had read: "...Any and all restrictions of this right shall be subject to text, history, and tradition." instead of strict scrutiny.