Independence of judiciary paramount

I am so honored to be selected as a district court judge. I have no illusions about the difficulty, and the seriousness, and the rigor of the task before me. Yet, I am excited and energized about this new challenge in my legal career. I consider serving on the bench to be the absolute highest calling of the law. I am very proud to be part of a judiciary that I can say without reservation is one of the best in the United States, and by logical extension, perhaps the world.

That being said, I am also very concerned about the judiciary in Iowa. Anyone who has read a newspaper, or listened to the radio, or absorbed any kind of news over the last couple of years knows that the judiciary here in Iowa has been challenged and criticized. The process by which Iowa selects its judges and the very nature of the judicial process has come under attack.

The good news is that those who have challenged the judiciary have the absolute guaranteed legal right to freely and forcefully express their opinions and views. The not-so-good news is that the judiciary, by its very nature, has been relatively quiet and very measured in its response to these challenges. Judges just don?t like inserting themselves into political matters. The judiciary, in trying to remain impartial and unbiased, and avoid even the appearance of partiality and bias, generally does not inject itself into the fray of politics. After all, judges take an oath that they ?will, without fear, favor, affection, or hope of reward?administer justice according to law.?

Each branch of government has its job to do. Each player within each branch has their role to fulfill and boundaries to maintain. The role of the judge is to be above the political fray, and without fear of retribution, to make good and just and reasonable decisions according to the rule of law. As the first chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, John Marshall once said, ?Courts are the mere instruments of the law, and can will nothing...Judicial power is never exercised for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the judge; always for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the Legislature; or, in other words, to the will of the law.?

I believe that, by and large, that?s what the judges of this state understand their role to be, and they work extremely hard at fulfilling that role. And that?s why the judiciary of this state is rated as one of the best and fairest in the country. It?s why we as Iowans can be proud of our judiciary, and why I am now proud to be a part of it.

The very nature of the judicial system, however, is to decide disputes. And no matter how impartial, or fair, or faithful to the law the judges of this state may be in making decisions concerning such disputes, there is generally a pretty clear winner and a pretty clear loser. It is only human nature not to want to be the loser, not to have our view of the matter rejected as untenable or inconsistent with the law. And so, with any decision of the court, there?s bound to be someone who?s not very happy with the outcome. And when such a decision, although based on a conscientious application of the law, is inconsistent with the world view of many people, perhaps even a majority of the people, the decision doesn?t just cause some unhappiness, it causes a major uproar. And, that?s OK. We?re not all alike. We have differing views of the world. Vigorous debate concerning differing and competing views are at the heart of what it means to be American.

But here is my big concern. The beauty, the miracle, the greatness of our system of government and our American society has been that, even when we may radically disagree on certain issues, we respect and follow the rule of law. We may not like it, and we may do everything in our power to try and change it through all available political means, but at the end of the day, we respect and follow the rule of law. This respect for the rule of law is what protects us from the whim of ego and autocracy, and from the agony, torture and death that so many unfortunate souls on the minority side of an uproar have suffered throughout history. This respect for the rule of law is what sets us apart from the rest of the world and the rest of history. It?s a concept for which thousands of Americans have fought and died.

And yet, in the past couple of years it has basically been suggested that if we don?t like the rule of law, we should just ignore it. And it?s been suggested that we should change the way we select our judges so their decisions might more closely reflect the will of the people. I?m no historian, but I think any credible examination of American or Iowa history clearly shows that such an attitude toward the role of the judiciary is completely inconsistent with the checks and balances that are built into our system of government to avoid abuses of individual rights and abuses between the branches of government. The judiciary undeniably must be responsible and accountable, but it must be independent. The judiciary undeniably must declare what the law is, and not what it should be, but it should not shrink from its duty to strike down those laws that violate the constitution and the rights of the people. In summary, the judiciary must serve as a bulwark against tyranny, rather than a bridge that leads to it.

Can the judicial branch be improved? Of course. Can the legislative and executive branches be improved? Of course. Government, after all, is us. It?s not us versus them. It?s us. Together, as citizens, we can make it better. And here?s what I propose we collectively do.

First of all, let?s vote. Second, let?s all learn more about how our government really works. Let?s focus more on teaching our children how our government really works. Let?s get kids in courtrooms, and see the legislature in action, and learn about the administrative and leadership functions of the executive branch. And, finally, let?s hold ourselves, each branch of government, and all the citizens who work within government, appropriately accountable for transparently doing our job, and for doing it well. I am convinced that through education, transparency and honest discussion about how government can properly fulfill its role in society, all Iowans, all branches of government, and the fabric of civilized society, the law, will be better served.

So, today is not about me. It?s about all of us, working together for a better community, state and nation.

Myron Gookin gave this speech Friday in Fairfield when sworn in as an 8th Judicial District judge.