And, given the above ruling already made by Scotus, Congress should make this new law non-reviewable by the Federal Court system.
The concept of “judicial review” does not appear in the Constitution and represents one of the earliest instances of judicial activism—The Supreme Court essentially inventing a role for itself out of thin air.
It would be fascinating to watch the fall-out from a modern-day leader rejecting a SC ruling on that basis.
Not going to happen. The three heads of the fedgov monster, along with all of the bootlickers at the state level, are falling over themselves to milk the gay lobby, and exploit it for all the money and control they can wring out of it.
Protected class+politcal correctness+affirmative action+K street=$$$$$$!
Obummer and the Supreme Court=
A Marriage Made in Hell
I agree 100%,
Even if we cant beat the libs in the courts(more and more so with Kennedy) , conservatives could make this into a illegitimate imposition rule of court’s tyranny.
That those marriages are not valid because the courts mandated them against the states voters will. ‘Sodomy celebration’ licenses mandated by Democrat appointees.
Unfortunately I see House Republicans will probably duck the whole issue.
Not likely when so many are out there falling over themselves praising SCOTUS for nixing a law they voted for twenty years ago.
The CONSTITUTION protects it.....The Congress and Clown and Courts notwithstanding.
Except California, because we can't allow the people to amend their own Constitution in manners which we don't like. [/sarc]
And seriously, if the Congress can't firmly stand against something popularly unpopular like ObamaCare or the NSA-spying, how/why would we expect them to make a less-popular moral stand?
All Congress is willing to protect is their cash influx.
It’s going to take more than this to stop gay marriage.
The feds have military marriages, millions of employee marriages, and immigration marriages to deal with, already 17 states worth of Americans can call themselves married as gays, and we live in a fluid society.
It is going to take something more powerful than this to defeat gay marriage.
As the media works on the checkerboard aspects, and the plain unworkability of this, as people move and are transferred from one state to another, then the left will roll over us within a few short years unless we come up with more.
If not, their hypocrisy is showing.
Will the courts allow them to do that?
Marriage is an institution defined by God, not man. If we have separation of Church and State, because people who are hostile to godly marriage are now in control of too many government decisions, it is time to have separation of Marriage and State.
The State attempts to force us to recognize its power. One way is to presume the power to define who is married and who is not. We cede this power in part because we allow the State to tax incomes and estates. To administer such taxing power, the State must define who it considers to be “married” and who is not. Just as when it defines a corporation to be a “person”, as silly as this would be to God, the State does not hesitate to define anyone it pleases as being “married”, totally apart from how God would define them. Sadly, even ministers allow the State’s definition of marriage to be the controlling definition.
It is time to return marriage to the private sphere. Then government’s only job is to respect the decisions of its citizens.