A proposed constitutional amendment aimed at restoring the option for some child crime victims to testify remotely in a trial passed the Iowa House Thursday, completing the first major step toward amending the Iowa Constitution.
Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird proposed the amendment to reverse an Iowa Supreme Court ruling last year that made Iowa the only state to not allow remote testimony for some child witnesses.
The 4-3 opinion said the use of one-way video testimony, where the witness cannot see the defendant, violated a defendant’s constitutional right to confront witnesses.
Bird said kids shouldn’t be forced to testify “at arm’s length” from their alleged abuser.
“And as a prosecutor, I know that restoring these protections is critical in preventing kids from getting too scared to testify, cases from getting dropped and abusers from walking free,” she said in an emailed statement. “I am grateful to the Iowa Legislature for passing this amendment to ensure kids are protected and abusers are brought to justice.”
The proposal passed the Senate unanimously in March. It would have to be approved by the Legislature again in 2027 or 2028 to get on the ballot for Iowa voters to decide.
“We are trying to protect minors who are victims of incredibly horrific abuse and protect them from being retraumatized in our justice system."Rep. Lindsay James
The proposed amendment would add the following language to the Iowa Constitution:
“Protection of children and other witnesses. To protect children under the age of 18 and any witness with a mental illness, intellectual disability, or other developmental disability, the right of an accused to confront such witnesses may be limited by law.”
The House voted 87-6 to advance the amendment.
Rep. Mark Thompson, R-Clarion, said he has met survivors of “horrible abuse.”
“Their courage is beyond reproach, and their courage is dampened when they are forced to face the person who allegedly abused them,” he said. “In some cases they never testify, so justice is not served in those cases. I think we’re all here to make sure that justice is served upon the most vile criminals in our society.”
Some defense lawyers have said the amendment is too broad and could allow lawmakers to limit defendants’ rights beyond allowing video testimony for certain vulnerable witnesses.
Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City, voted against the proposal. He said he doesn’t deny the problem that the amendment is trying to solve, but it’s going in the wrong direction.
“The last five words of the amendment open the door wide to mischief by future legislatures,” Thomson said. “Not accusing anyone of ill intent. I just think if we’re going to be amending the constitution, we should do it properly.”
Rep. Lindsay James, D-Dubuque, said the constitutional questions are important, but the Legislature needs to address the issue that the Iowa Supreme Court ruling created.
“We are trying to protect minors who are victims of incredibly horrific abuse and protect them from being retraumatized in our justice system,” she said.
The Iowa House previously passed a bill that would have allowed two-way video testimony, in which the witness and the defendant could see each other. The Senate did not advance it.
Bird said a bill would not be enough. She said a constitutional amendment was needed because the Iowa Supreme Court did not specify if two-way video testimony would satisfy the constitution.
Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, said the court left lawmakers with “an interesting conundrum as we try to protect children in the courts.” He said there are legitimate concerns with the amendment.
“We’re rolling the dice, because we kind of weren’t given a lot of options because the Supreme Court was silent on what they did expect,” Holt said.
