Well answer this: If the judges's job is to simply agree with the majority, why bother having judges in the first place?"congrats" to all on the turnout at the polls. We were able to show that interpretations of the "peoples" state constitution can not be amended or decided by the opinions of 7 people. The opinion of a Judge is no better than the opinions and views of the people of the state of Iowa. Well done Iowa!
Could it possibly be that opinions of the electorate could be based mainly on their own views and personal biases whereas those of the judiciary are based on interpretation of the Cosntitution? Once again, why bother having judges if all they're going to do is agree with the majority?