“He should be demanding that they ignore it- and getting other states to join him in civil disobedience.”
Please explain to me how a USA Senator can ‘demand’ anything of local court clerks.
you’re right -brain fart- I was thinking he was governor- totally spaced it there- Passing a stone right now, and not thinjkign clearly- good catch
[[INSKEEP (NPR): Which is a great story. But did I just understand you to suggest that state officials should feel no particular obligation to follow the court ruling if they feel it’s illegitimate?
CRUZ: They should feel no obligation to agree that the court ruling is right or is consistent with the Constitution.
INSKEEP: I really want to get to other views in the — other issues in the book, but I feel it’s important to clarify this one thing.
Did I understand you to say just now that as you read the law, as you read our system, this decision is not binding on the entire country, only to the specific states that were named in the — in the suit.
CRUZ: Article III of the Constitution gives the court the authority to resolve cases and controversies. Those cases and controversies, when they’re resolved, when you’re facing a judicial order, the parties to that suit are bound to it. Those who are not parties to the suit are not bound by it.]]
This kinda goes Along the lines of what I was talking about- even though I spaced it about Ted being senator, not gov. (6 hours of hell on earth with that kidney stone- it was brutal!) look to post number 81 in this thread- Ted could be leading the charge, along with the tea party- to encourage states to simply ignore the laws passed recently, and yes, even to pass law forbidding clerks to perform the marriages
This owudl of course entail losing gubmint funding no doubt as the gubmint blackmails the states- but again, there was a case not too long ago where states banded together in concerted effort to ignore federal law, and to ban federal enforcers from enforcing the laws I n their states- and the government had to back down-