The tenth amendment of the USA is CLEAR, and the Constitution of the state of Florida ALREADY DEFINES marriage.
Florida NEEDS NOT be forced to change its ACCURATE definition of marriage.
Pam Bondi is an amoral politiwhore.
She fits right in with the Floriduh GOPe.
How about let the PEOPLE decide as they already have damn it! I am getting sick of Repukes!
This is a strategy that allows her boss to punt the question before the Gubernatorial election.
I bet she supports state's rights regarding marijuana, recreational or otherwise, or open carry laws for example.
The homosexual mafia only has power because people like Bondi give it to them.
Understand that I do NOT support gay marriage. I think these decisions are wrong but not for 10th Amendment reasons.
No. Not only is the 10th Amendment not clear over 200 years of SCOTUS and other Court decisions, the 10th Amendment really gives the States very little in the way of rights. It let’s them keep what they did not give away. But they gave away almost everything to the Feds via the Supremacy clause and the Commerce Clause (among others).
Also, there is no “clarity” on Constitutional interpretation. If there was, there would be no need for Courts to ever decide. It would be like a vending machine where you just push a button for an answer. Conservative, Libtard, in the middle ... it does not matter. Almost no one agrees 100% on Constitutional interpretation.
By way of example, to define what is “an unreasonable search and seizure” (the primary issue I have argued before SCOTUS) is utterly impossible. Each case is taken on it’s own merits with numerous judicial permutations and decisions added in.
As a law professor I had once said ... the answer is NEVER the Tenth Amendment. That’s about 99% true.
Since judges repeatedly overturn 10th Amendment solutions to this issue, what do you propose?
I don’t get her position in once sense. In another I can understand it.
Still, Pammy is sohhhh hittable and since Laz ain’t around much I think I’ll take my shot with her.
Yeah, we’ll go for a long walk in Paris, by the river Seine, sipping champagne and eating chocolate dipped strawberries, while we take in the scenery of river boats passing by.
This strategy is best done at dusk or in the beginning of the evening.
Women usually love this sort of attention...
Like the SC is so ‘American’. IMHO, the SC, for the most part, is anti-Constitution as well as anti-American.
Let God decide the issue. I think He already has.
Otherwise, if she understands how the Constitution works then she knows that the rules for deciding the constitutionally of things like gay marriage are simple. The Constitution's silence about marriage means two things.
The Founding States had made the 10th Amendment to clarify that the Constitution's silence about any issue, such as marriage, means that it's up to individual states to decide their own policies for such things.
Pro-gay, politically correct interpretations of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protections Clause aside, the states have never amended the Constitution to make gay marriage an enumerated right. So individual states can decide against gay marriage.
So why then is there any need for any other government whatsoever outside of the “Supreme” Court?
We could save ourselves a lot of money by not funding 100 quadrillion vestigial organs of government...