iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

JFK Profile In Courage Awards Given To Iowa Judges, U.S. Ambassador Robert Ford

By RODRIQUE NGOWI 05/07/12 05:20 PM ET AP

BOSTON — President John F. Kennedy's only surviving child celebrated what would have been his 95th birthday this month by honoring three Iowa judges who were ousted after the court unanimously decided to legalize same-sex marriages.

Caroline Kennedy on Monday also recognized the U.S. ambassador to Syria who risked his life to support opponents of President Basher Assad's regime.

Kennedy heads the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation, which promotes the late president's memory and legacy. She presented the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award on Monday to former Iowa Chief Justice Marsha Ternus and justices David Baker and Michael Streit, all of whom were pushed off the bench in a 2010 retention vote.

The three judges received a sterling silver ship's lantern symbolizing a beacon of hope. The award, designed by Caroline Kennedy's husband, Edwin Schlossberg, and crafted by Tiffany & Co., resembles one belonging to the U.S. Navy's oldest commissioned warship, the USS Constitution.

Ternus, Baker and Streit were among seven justices who decided in 2009 that an Iowa law restricting marriage to a man and a woman violated the state's constitution. Conservative groups and other gay marriage foes spent about $1 million on a political campaign to oust the judges, who chose not to raise money or campaign to avoid dragging the judiciary into politics.

"We recognized that opposition would surface. We were not naive," Baker said at the award ceremony. "Had we chosen to form campaign committees and actively campaigned, we would have tacitly admitted that we were what we claimed not to be – politicians."

That decision by the three judges was courageous in light of the divisive campaign that was unleashed against them, Kennedy said.

"For judges to be targeted for an individual decision is really something that threatens the liberty of all Americans and that's what happened in this case. So the award is intended to both to honor their decision and also make people more aware of the dangers and the threat to an independent judiciary, which is something all Americans should value." Kennedy told The Associated Press.

"The bedrock of our democracy is the rule of law and that means we have to have an independent judiciary, judges who can make decisions independent of the political winds that are blowing," said Kennedy, who is a lawyer.

The danger of politicizing the judiciary is particularly pronounced in areas where state and county judges spend growing amounts of money to get elected or fend off electoral challenges sponsored by groups promoting narrow agendas, she said.

"People aren't so much aware of it, but it's happening in judicial races much more than it ever did before, on the local level and even further up," Kennedy said.

Ternus, the former chief justice, said: "Efforts to intimidate the judiciary and to turn judges into politicians or theologians in robes undermine fair and impartial justice and will, over time, destroy the ability and willingness of judges to do their duty as faithful guardians of the constitution."

Bob Vander Plaats, a Sioux City businessman and former Republican candidate for governor, led efforts to oust the three judges, arguing that being a servant of the law "doesn't give the Iowa Supreme Court the authority to legislate from the bench, execute from the bench or attempt to amend the Constitution."

Monday's ceremony at the JFK Library and Museum also honored U.S. Ambassador Robert Ford for ignoring repeated threats to his life and traveling around Syria to encourage and support peaceful protesters targeted by Assad's brutal crackdown.

The protests and the ensuing crackdown spawned military defections, an armed rebellion, assassinations of government and military officials, massacres of civilians and international condemnation. A truce set to begin on April 12 has failed to stop the bloodshed, raising fears that Syria is degenerating into civil war.

The U.N. says 9,000 people have died in Syria since the uprising began in March 2011.

Ford, who left Syria as security conditions worsened, was in Boston to accept the award. The Denver native, who now lives in Baltimore, remains the U.S. envoy to Syria.

"Ambassador Ford has really gone out of his way to redefine the American role (in the international arena) and the importance of courageous American diplomats to support aspirations for freedoms around the world," Kennedy said.

Last year's award went to Wael Ghonim, the Google executive credited with helping to inspire the uprising in Egypt.

The Profile in Courage Award is named after the JFK book "Profiles in Courage," winner of a Pulitzer Prize in 1957.

Past recipients include President Gerald Ford and former U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, who is now a U.N. special envoy working on a tenuous peace plan for Syria.

This year's award also celebrates what would have been the late president's 95th birthday, on May 29.

"I think one of my father's great legacies is the people that he inspired and the generation that he inspired transformed America through civil rights, women's rights, equal justice, and they've passed that on to their children and grandchildren. And I think he also really changed the way America looks at the world and the world looks at America – and I think that, internationally, he's still an inspiration," Kennedy said. "And so that's something that means a great deal to me and that we celebrate every day."

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
BOSTON — President John F. Kennedy's only surviving child celebrated what would have been his 95th birthday this month by honoring three Iowa judges who were ousted after the court unanimously d...
BOSTON — President John F. Kennedy's only surviving child celebrated what would have been his 95th birthday this month by honoring three Iowa judges who were ousted after the court unanimously d...
Filed by Luke Johnson  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 451
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chr1st1an
Pound the temple to dust
01:18 PM on 06/07/2012
I have a hard time believing that JFK would have honored people ("justices") who unilaterally deemed that the will of we the people (75% to 95%, depending on which state) is subservient to their own "morals" on this key issue.

If he DID, then somebody waited far too long to assassinate him. Is this due to his being a Catholic: did he really believe that Protestants are subservient to Catholics?

How about WE THE PEOPLE who they clearly despise, REMOVE from them any benefits they derived from being on our shores, award them the "Ternus, Baker and Streit Plaque", exile them to the choice vacation spot of their choice where people already believe in gay marriage (like Brazil or South Africa), and give them 40 acres and a mule THERE?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chr1st1an
Pound the temple to dust
01:49 PM on 06/09/2012
"Turn[Against]us, [hit the]streit], [no more]baker[for you] Plaque"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ZeraLee
A Citizen's View from Main Street
04:13 AM on 05/10/2012
The recall was valid under article I, sec. 2 of the Iowa constitution, but violated article I, sec. 4 of the same constitution.

The SSM ban clearly violated the Iowa state constitution, article I, sections 1, 3, 4, and 6 as well as Article IV and Amendment 14, sec. 1 of the US Constitution.

"All men and women are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain inalienable rights — among which are ... pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness." - including marriage.

"The general assembly shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" - including churches willing to marry gays.

"no person shall be deprived of any of his rights, privileges, or capacities, or disqualified from the performance of any of his public or private duties, or rendered incompetent to give evidence in any court of law or equity, in consequence of his opinions on the subject of religion"

"the general assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens."

These judges did their constitutional duty, and were sacked by the tyranny of mob rule. The awards are well deserved.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chr1st1an
Pound the temple to dust
01:22 PM on 06/07/2012
You have no more of a right to promote gay marriage than you do to promote murder.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ZeraLee
A Citizen's View from Main Street
03:56 AM on 05/10/2012
“The standard of good behavior for the continuance in office of the judicial magistracy, is certainly one of the most valuable of the modern improvements in the practice of government. In a monarchy it is an excellent barrier to the despotism of the prince; in a republic it is a no less excellent barrier to the encroachments and oppressions of the representative body. And it is the best expedient which can be devised in any government, to secure a steady, upright, and impartial administration of the laws.”

“The members of the legislature will rarely be chosen with a view to those qualifications which fit men for the stations of judges; and as, on this account, there will be great reason to apprehend all the ill consequences of defective information, so, on account of the natural propensity of such bodies to party divisions, there will be no less reason to fear that the pestilential breath of faction may poison the fountains of justice. The habit of being continually marshalled on opposite sides will be too apt to stifle the voice both of law and of equity.”

“These considerations teach us to applaud the wisdom of those States who have committed the judicial power, in the last resort, not to a part of the legislature, but to distinct and independent bodies of men.”
The Federalist Papers
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Guardian56
02:32 PM on 05/08/2012
wow ,if I get fired by the people I work for can I get a reward?
I'm gonna go get me some cracker jacks and see if I can get a Nobel Peace prize of it.
11:57 AM on 05/08/2012
Awesome! When I first heard the bigots in Iowa voted these brave Justices off the bench, I said to myself that they should win the Profile In Courage award and now they have! I'm so proud of them for doing what was right!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jack579
11:36 AM on 05/08/2012
Congratulations to the recipients, well deserved..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Guardian56
02:33 PM on 05/08/2012
so if your boss hires you to do a job that HE wants you to do and you do the opposite and get fired you deserve a reward?
11:35 AM on 05/08/2012
About as worthless as obamas nobel prize
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ultrawiz
Holding the Middle Ground
11:49 AM on 05/08/2012
Don't you just hate it when honest people stand up to Repub BS?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Guardian56
02:33 PM on 05/08/2012
honest?....ROFLMAO
amd52
Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder.
11:18 AM on 05/08/2012
And JFK as we all know was not committed to his wife either, for he as well had cheated on her which she over looked and that was the wrong message to send being President of The USA.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ultrawiz
Holding the Middle Ground
11:51 AM on 05/08/2012
If that's all you remember (if you're even old enough to remember) about JFK then you're pretty clueless.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Guardian56
02:34 PM on 05/08/2012
didn't he also kill his girlfriend?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:39 AM on 05/08/2012
Man, the bigots are out in full force on HP today!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cosatjockomo
10:27 AM on 05/08/2012
Same sex marriage has not been permitted anywhere in the country until recent political winds began blowing that way. Iowa did not legislatively change what the law permits, the judges changed the law through judicial activism under pressure from those political winds. They ignored the law to forward their personal agenda (right or wrong). The voters in Iowa agreed with what I'm saying and removed the judges because they betreyed their possitions of authority. Guess this is a case of the winners redefining and rewriting history. This is not a case of "judges who can make decisions independent of the political winds that are blowing," it is a case where judges make political decisions independant of the law that exists. They had no business sitting on the bench.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:37 AM on 05/08/2012
Complete BS. The judges removed an unconstitutional law denying equality to a segment of society that was created only out of bigotry, fear, and ignorance. They did their job, which is to ensure that the legislature does not overreach its authority. The legislature created Iowa's DOMA law that denied equal rights to certain citizens. The supreme court struck the law down, opening the door for ALL Iowans to have access to the same rights. No new laws were created here. Just because you have a problem with gays, doesn't mean you are on the right side of history. It only means you are on the right.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ultrawiz
Holding the Middle Ground
11:55 AM on 05/08/2012
Isn't it refreshing when judges uphold the law? The right just hates it when the Constitution is followed instead of their outrageous demands.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tincup2005
10:43 AM on 05/08/2012
Your argument is totally unsubstantiated. The US Constitution makes no distinction on the basis of sex specific to rights. The deniability of rights to anyone guaranteed them by law forced this issue. It began with the woman's right to vote. The Courts ruled women have that right because the Constitution makes no sexual distinction. Now, for gays, the same rule applies. They have that right. The Constitution makes no sexual distinction. It is the radical right that discolors the law with perverse politics that runs contrary to what our founding fathers envisioned. How many gays do you think died in all the wars that our nation has fought? Did not their sacrifice merit equal treatment under the law? I am not gay, but my personal philosophy is I do not attack people who do not attack me. How many judges do you think were voted off the bench by southern racists who wanted to keep slavery intact? Were they wrong because they interpreted the law as being "all men are created equal?" These judges committed political suicide with their ruling. They did it with their eyes wide open. Fortunately, they kept their oath to honor the Constitution. Amen.
08:53 AM on 05/08/2012
The Iowa judges were elected, and the same electorate that seats them has the right to unseat them. Maybe you think judges should not be an elected office, but the fact is in IA they are.

To brand them "courageous" for their pro-SSM stand is to blatantly politicize the Profile in Courage Award, and it loses all credibility and respect. I believe this observation needs to be relayed to the committee, and so . . .
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:38 AM on 05/08/2012
The judges were appointed, not elected. But the public has the right to vote on retention after a certain period of time.
10:55 AM on 05/08/2012
Thank you for the clarification. In some jurisdictions around the country certain judges are elected. In any case, the people of IA acted with their rightful purview.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ZeraLee
A Citizen's View from Main Street
03:39 AM on 05/10/2012
On the contrary, The SSM ban clearly violated the Iowa constitution, art. I, sections 1, 3, 4, and 6 as well as art. IV and amendment 14 of the US Constitution.

While the recall was valid under art. I, sec. 2 of the Iowa constitution, it violated art. I, sec. 4 of the same constitution.

“Hamilton had written that through the practice of judicial review the Court ensured that the will of the whole people, as expressed in their Constitution, would be supreme over the will of a legislature, whose statutes might express only the temporary will of part of the people. And Madison had written that constitutional interpretation must be left to the reasoned judgment of independent judges, rather than to the tumult and conflict of the political process. If every constitutional question were to be decided by public political bargaining, Madison argued, the Constitution would be reduced to a battleground of competing factions, political passion and partisan spirit.”
http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/constitutional.aspx

The judges showed a dedication to constitutional government that was treated with contempt by conservative voters. The judges showed the courage to stick to the fundamental principles of justice.

The award was well deserved.
02:57 PM on 05/10/2012
Nice try, but . . .

Apart from the fact that the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution does NOT stand for the proposition that gays have a right to unilaterally rewrite laws to suit themselves, and Article IV is irrelevant; I have read Article I, Sec. 1 - 6 of the IA Constitution, which likewise provide no basis whatever for the IA judges' decision.

The part in that IA Constitution passage that does stand out as applicable is Section 2:

"Political Power

"All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the people, and they have the right, at all times, to alter or reform the same, whenever the public good may require it."

So the People of IA did the right thing, for the right reasons. Enacting a constitutional amendment takes an enormous effort and commitment supported by a super-majority of the people, and don't you or anyone else dare dismiss it as just "political passion" and the other of Madison's pejoratives -- which are not part of the Constitution, btw.

Judges decide on "constitutional interpretation," but it is the right of the people to "reform the same" that prevails here.
03:07 PM on 05/10/2012
Neglected to ask how on earth you think Article I, sec. 4 of the IA Constitution is relevant? Only by resorting to prejudices and false associations.
photo
breeze5208
You deserve what you earn
08:45 AM on 05/08/2012
This is as close as a Kennedy should ever get again to politics.
08:41 AM on 05/08/2012
.....JFK chickened out against Khrushchev and in the Bay of Pigs, he is THE reason Castro is still in power. "Profiles in Courage" ? my donkey's behind.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CamelPaw357
08:47 AM on 05/08/2012
Agreed. His action (or inaction) at the Bay of Pigs was shameful and it cost thousands of good people, many Americans. Plus, JFK was much like Clinton. He would hop into bed with any women willing to submit. JFK was not an honorable man.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tincup2005
10:02 AM on 05/08/2012
What history are you reading? JFK stood toe-to-toe to with Khruschev and won the Mexican stand off. Nikita lost power for backing down. The way JFK handled the Cuban crisis has been studied for years for its textbook execution. It was a defining moment in world politics. Another example of the right wing trying to re-write history. Your only hope to advance your skewed vision of history is to burn the history books and write fiction.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cosatjockomo
10:15 AM on 05/08/2012
3 months after the Cuban missle crises, the Soviets had nukes in Cuba anyway.
amd52
Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder.
11:26 AM on 05/08/2012
LOL FUNNY THANKS FOR THE LAUGH.
07:58 AM on 05/08/2012
Was not the book "Profiles in Courage" actually written by JFK's press secretary Pierre Salinger? Was it not shown that the only thing JFK had written for the book was his name as the author? Do these people who give out this award have no shame? Are they a group of Liberals in denial of reality? Maybe, denial of reality is what makes a democrat voter.
JakeT
GOP - where being a draft and tax dodger is good
08:18 AM on 05/08/2012
I'm guessing you are a fake news follower since your post has no facts and worthless allegations. 1) Kennedy co-wrote the book with Sorenson, not Salinger. 2) In May 2008, Sorensen himself clarified in his autobiography, Counselor, how he collaborated with Kennedy on the book 3) JFK publicly acknowledged in his introduction to the book Sorensens eextensive role in its composition. You can go back to your fake news ranting now.
09:03 AM on 05/08/2012
All your "facts" do not one thing to salvage the Award from being discredited by being awarded to elected officials who abused their power to push through their ideology.

The people of IA, who put themselves through the arduous effort required to unseat the rogue judges and enact a constitutional amendment to uphold the priceless marriage principle -- they are the ones who deserve an award for courage.
09:27 AM on 05/08/2012
Co-wrote the book???? Why is Sorenson not given author credit then? Even if it was Sorenson and not Salinger abd Sorenson contributed- it would have to have been as a consulting role- otherwise authorship credit would have to apply. Also, why did JFK split the revenue from the book woth Sorenson? Awfully generous for a non-authorship role? Maybe you should go and as a famous radio newscaster said "Get the rest of the story". OH yeah, read the stories on the Salinger ghost writing also. One more thing - try to read BOTH sides of an issue before you blindly spout liberal rhetoric. Fake news follower?? Hypocrisy wears well on you!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tincup2005
10:03 AM on 05/08/2012
Another example of a right winger shooting off his mouth with no knowledge of the facts. Typical.
06:27 PM on 05/08/2012
The BS you swallow are not facts
06:29 PM on 05/08/2012
The BS you swallow iare not facts, ace.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
ccdae5
Not a 1%'er...........yet
07:57 AM on 05/08/2012
More dishonest HP spin, the judges were voted out because their radical views did not represent the majority public opinion in Iowa. They were not "ousted". Be honest HP.
JakeT
GOP - where being a draft and tax dodger is good
08:18 AM on 05/08/2012
they were ousted because they did their job, intrepret the existing law against the existin constitution. for that they were ousted.
09:29 AM on 05/08/2012
Living in denial Jake???
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tincup2005
10:04 AM on 05/08/2012
Judges are not appointed to represent the majority. That's what politics is all about. Their job is to interpret the law. Big difference.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
ccdae5
Not a 1%'er...........yet
05:10 PM on 05/08/2012
Agreed, but if they are elected positions they serve at the pleasure of the electorate.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
ccdae5
Not a 1%'er...........yet
05:11 PM on 05/08/2012
The electorate didn't agree with their interpretation.