Posted on 07/14/2006 9:05:22 AM PDT by Houmatt
LINCOLN, Neb. - A federal appeals court has reversed a ruling that struck down Nebraska's same-sex marriage ban.
The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday reversed an earlier ruling by U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon, who ruled last year that the measure was too broad and deprived gays and lesbians of participation in the political process, among other things.
Seventy percent of Nebraska voters approved the amendment in 2000.
The court said the amendment "and other laws limiting the state-recognized institution of marriage to heterosexual couples are rationally related to legitimate state interests and therefore do not violate the Constitution of the United States."
Attorney General Jon Bruning argued earlier that the ban should be restored because it "does not violate any person's freedom of expression or association."
Opponents of the ban "are free to gather, express themselves, lobby, and generally participate in the political process however they see fit," he said. "Plaintiffs are free to petition state senators to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot. Plaintiffs are similarly free to begin an initiative process to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot, just as supporters ... did."
"Saturday, May 14, 2005
Judge Joseph Bataillon Joins Judicial Dictatorship
Clinton appointee U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon has joined his activist judicial brethren by striking down the law against gay marriage, passed by Nebraska voters. Bataillon found a portion of the law, which stated a ban on civil unions, unconstitutional. Bataillon said that the ban on gay marriage “imposes significant burdens on both the expressive and intimate associational rights and creates a significant barrier to the plaintiffs’ right to petition or to participate in the political process.” Note: I have no idea how the ban on gay marriage, as Judge Bataillon stated, “creates a significant barrier to the plaintiffs’ right to petition or to participate in the political process”. One has to be married to have a right to petition and participate in the political process? Is he saying that single people no longer have any rights? That doesn’t make any sense. When he wrote his ‘ruling’ was Judge Bataillon smoking some funny cigarette?
However, instead of simply striking down the portion of the voted on legislation that also bans the aforementioned civil unions, Judge Bataillon apparently decided to impose his own belief system by dismissing the law in its entirety. In a column I wrote last July, I predicted that any Defense of Marriage laws would be overturned and thrown out by activist judges. Unfortunately, it looks like I was right.
Judge Bataillon has now proudly united himself with the California and Florida Supreme Courts and the Ninth Circuit Court, amongst others, which consistently vote down the laws passed by voters; if these laws do not correspond to the judges’ personal desires. Although there is nothing ‘unconstitutional’ about a ban on gay marriage, growing groups of activist judges are regularly, with their decisions, rewriting state constitutions and the US Constitution.
The question “How does the minority Democrat Party remain in power and wield that power over the majority Republican Party?” has been firmly and unequivocally answered. All that needs to be effected is to use their Dem-appointed judges to impose its will and ideologies on US citizens. Note: This is why it is vital that Originalist judges are appointed to appellate and SCOTUS positions, instead of Activist judges.
Currently, the United States is locked in a battle of Socialism (the Marxist interim step before Communism) vs. Democracy. In 2004, the United States’ electorate voted for Democracy. But, the Dem appointed liberal and leftist activist judicial system is working overtime to ensure that the will of the people is blocked; each and every time these activist judges don’t agree with the decisions citizens make. As the liberal and leftist Dems continue to spew their phrase “every vote counts”, what they really mean is “every vote counts as long as you agree with us”. We already know what happens if the Dems do not agree with the voters. Whenever possible, they simply have their in-pocket judges throw out our decisions…and our votes. Is this any way to run a country? Sure it is. But, only if that country is ruled by a dictatorship. Unless we the people throw off our cloaks of complacency and rise up to firmly tell our elected officials to stop this headlong plunge into tyranny, this is what we will very soon be forced to endure."
Sorry. That article was from the Conservative Tymes.
same subject fyi
So if the libs are doing this to the laws, imagine what the divorce court lib judges are doing to families.
Every day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.