Republicans are moving forward with a plan to change how Iowa's judges are picked, undeterred by accusations from Democrats that their proposal amounts to a political power grab.

One week after the measure was introduced, it passed through House and Senate subcommittees and advanced through the Senate Judiciary Committee on a party-line vote. An identical bill is expected to advance through the House Judiciary Committee soon.

Gov. Kim Reynolds, a Republican, has said she supports the changes, which would give lawmakers and the governor more power over Iowa's judicial nominating system.

While Republican leaders in the Legislature described the proposal as a means of making the process more accountable to voters, some conservatives have described the bill as a correction to court decisions with which they disagree.

► Get the news Iowa depends upon. Subscribe to the Des Moines Register

"Iowa has one of the most activist supreme courts in the country with rulings against law enforcement, a ruling against ‘finding’ an evolving standard and right to abortion, and a ruling redefining marriage, all in direct defiance of your duly passed laws," said Chuck Hurley, a lobbyist for the Family Leader. His group led a successful campaign in 2010 to oust three Iowa Supreme Court justices over a unanimous decision legalizing same-sex marriage in the state.

Comments like that prompt opponents to say legislators are intentionally inserting politics into the court system.

"Iowans understand this legislation is intended to advance a specific political agenda that you just heard about from Chuck Hurley," Connie Ryan, the chair of Justice Not Politics, told House lawmakers at a subcommittee meeting after Hurley spoke. Justice Not Politics advocates for independent courts.

Dueling ad campaigns decry 'special interests' and 'liberal trial lawyers'

The proposed changes are beginning to attract ad spending. On Tuesday, Justice Not Politics announced it would spend $25,000 to run online and radio ads opposing the proposed changes.

"Politicians and special interest groups are pushing to take complete control of who becomes a judge in Iowa," the ad states.

The Judicial Crisis Network, a national group that has funded multi-million dollar campaigns in support of Republican-appointed U.S. Supreme Court justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, is running online ads that say "liberal trial lawyers" have the power to pick judges in Iowa.

The ad says the current system is "making Iowa courts soft on crime, big on abortion and a gold mine for trial lawyers."

Douglas Keith, an attorney at the Brennan Center for Justice, based at New York University School of Law, said the Judicial Crisis Network has spent big money over the past several election cycles in states with competitive elections for supreme court justices, including Arkansas, Wisconsin and Michigan.

"They’re spending to determine who gets on the bench in a handful of states across the country," he said.

GOP leaders say effort not tied to specific court decisions

Republican leaders, including House Speaker Linda Upmeyer, R-Clear Lake, have said repeatedly that they don't believe the bill is a reaction to any specific court decisions.

"From our perspective, this is a process that currently doesn’t have much accountability … there’s just nothing in there that creates any accountability or a check and balance system," Upmeyer said.

The bill would change the commissions that recommend candidates for Iowa's governor to appoint as judges.

Half the commission members now are chosen by the governor and half are lawyers elected by other lawyers. The proposal would eliminate the lawyer elections and let legislative leaders of both parties appoint half the members. Half of the total members would still be lawyers.

► Get Iowa politics news in your inbox: Subscribe to our free politics newsletter

Sen. Julian Garrett, R-Indianola, said that setup will give Iowans more of a voice on nominating commissions.

"Under this proposal, everybody that's involved in establishing the commissions has accountability to somebody, to the voters, to the people," Garrett said.

But Sen. Rob Hogg, D-Cedar Rapids, said passing legislation isn't the right way to change a process that's set out in the Iowa Constitution. If Republicans want to alter the system, they should propose a constitutional amendment and put it before the voters, he said.

"I think your real complaint is you don’t like the way that people who are appointed by Democratic governors vote," Hogg said.

Keith, the attorney at the Brennan Center, called Iowa's proposal "the boldest piece of legislation" aimed at changing a state's judicial selection system that he's seen this year, but said it's not the only one. The Brennan Center has tracked 32 such bills in 19 states.

In some states, including Kentucky and Pennsylvania, proposed changes have come after high-profile supreme court rulings that drew controversy, he said.

"In a number of these states the legislation to change how judges are selected seems to be very directly related to specific decisions that legislators are frustrated about," Keith said.

One GOP senator thinks impeachment 'should be on the table'

In some cases, Iowa Republicans' accountability argument is muddied by their own messages about court cases they describe as "judicial tyranny."

Asked about one of his Facebook ads referencing "judicial tyranny," Sen. Jake Chapman, R-Adel, suggested impeachment for some Iowa Supreme Court justices "should be on the table" over a 5-2 decision last year that found a fundamental right to abortion under Iowa's Constitution.

"I think there needs to be an end to that judicial tyranny and unfortunately because of party politics we don’t have a legislature here that’s willing to hold them accountable through possible impeachment proceedings, you know, you just simply don’t have the numbers to do something like that," he said.

Chapman supports a separate proposal to amend Iowa's Constitution to state that the state doesn't secure or protect a right to abortion. But he said the two issues are separate.

"At the end of the day, do I think that we have some judges that are usurping the legislative branch and rewriting our Constitution? Absolutely," he said. "Does this nomination reform remove them from office? Does it do anything to their current status? The answer is no."

Sen. Brad Zaun, R-Urbandale, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he doesn't support impeaching Iowa's supreme court justices, adding that he reserves the right to speak to Chapman about the issue. He said changes to the judicial nominating system aren't about specific cases.

"This is not about personalities," Zaun said. "This is about looking at the process and trying to change it so the average Iowan has more input on the nomination process."

More recent news from the Iowa Legislature: