Gay 'marriage' foes seek injunction in federal court

THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | May 13, 2004 | By Cheryl Wetzstein

[TaxRelief]

Lawyers representing 11 Massachusetts lawmakers and a traditional-values group leader yesterday asked a federal judge in Boston to temporarily block the state from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples on Monday.

U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro said he would issue a ruling late today or tomorrow.

Matthew Staver, president and general counsel of the Florida-based Liberty Counsel, said the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court overstepped its jurisdiction in its Nov. 18 Goodridge et al. vs. Department of Public Health ruling, which legalized same-sex "marriages" in the state.

In that ruling, the high court said Massachusetts officials were violating same- sex couples' constitutional rights by denying them marriage licenses. Under its "reformulation" of marriage, the court ordered the state to begin issuing marriage licenses to adult couples, regardless of gender, as of May 17.

Conservative lawyers yesterday argued that under the Massachusetts Constitution, the executive and legislative branches have jurisdiction over marriage law and that the high court usurped its powers.

The federal court can intervene in this case, the lawyers argued, because it has the authority under the U.S. Constitution's "guarantee clause" to ensure that states respect this "separation of powers."

Massachusetts Assistant Attorney General Peter Sacks, arguing on behalf of the Massachusetts high court, said the decision was based on an interpretation of the state constitution and was within the high court's purview.

"These are pure questions of state law," Mr. Sacks said.

[TaxRelief]

There is more going on in the world than Nick Berg.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Pro-family groups need to do more of this sort of thing. Liberals have been exploiting the judicial branch for years now, and not just on gay issues. We had better get with it before they gain complete control. We need to be proactive. We need to sue our way to victory, build our premises in the courts, and get judges to force legislators to legislate our way. It's American government for the 21st century. If we hesitate we will lose. Enough of this defensive crap. When they frame the issue and choose the forum, they have the advantage. We need to go on the offense, doing more than just fighting for constitutional amendments.

[EdReform]

FEDERAL DOMA CHALLENGED IN COURT

[EdReform]

Ping

What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda

Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1)

Myth and Reality about Homosexuality--Sexual Orientation Section, Guide to Family Issues"

[TaxRelief]

We need to be proactive. We need to sue our way to victory, build our premises in the courts, and get judges to force legislators to legislate our way.

You mean--we need to face the reality that we no longer live in a republic?

We should just accept that we are now citizens of a judicial oligarchy?

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Yes, that's what I mean. Sigh! It's ugly, but if we do not start fighting lawsuits with lawsuits (fire with fire) then there will be no opportunity left to restore the republic.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Yeah, I read about that. Pitiful.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

See, our side keeps spending all of its time and money on defense. (Our legal organizations are all defense organizations) Their side is leading on the offense. (Their legal organizations are all offensive organizations.) We need to at least level the battleground. They should be on the defense at least as much as we are. So we need to find ways to sue them and whittle away at the legal premises they have built, not to mention help spend some of their offensive cash.

[thoughtomator]

This suit should be quite solidly grounded. The Constitution guarantees a republican form of government in every State, and the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruling is in clear violation of separation of powers.

Now only if we had some way of insuring the US Supreme Court adhered to separation of powers!

[I_Love_My_Husband]

Love what you said.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Thanks.

[Mears]

Wanna go to a wedding reception?

The City of Newton,Mass is going to have a wedding cake reception on the city hall grounds after marrying 2 of the plaintiffs in the case that brought this insanity to The Bay State.The public is invited!!!!!

Monday,May 17,2004. 3PM. Newton City Hall Grounds.

Nice that the taxpayers are paying for this,extra security and all.They didn't give me one cent towards my kids' weddings and they grew up in this awful city(back when it was a nice place to live)

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Sad. Bet the same city hall grounds would never allow the display of a nativity or the ten commandments. Nope! Now that might offend other people.

[Mears]

Christmas disappeared from this city about 30 years ago,liberal to the core.