Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CharlesWayneCT
“At the end of the 180 day stay, he was obligated as the executive of the state to implement the law as it was interpreted.”

This statement is ignorant nonsense. Romney was obligated as the Governor of Massachusetts to announce that the SJC had made a ridiculous ruling and that the state government would give it no effect. He was obligated to execute the law, not follow the absurd dictates of three fools who happen to be judges. If he had the slightest talent for leadership that is what he would have done. He didn’t because he doesn’t.

Either Romney doesn’t understand the proper roles of the judiciary and the executive in a properly functioning constitutional order or he approved of the SJC decision mandating gay marriage. Either way he has no business running for national office as a Republican.

298 posted on 01/22/2008 11:16:16 AM PST by fluffdaddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies ]


To: fluffdaddy
Either Romney doesn’t understand the proper roles of the judiciary and the executive in a properly functioning constitutional order or he approved of the SJC decision mandating gay marriage.

Hmmm. You say the Executive of MA has the obligation to ignore the SC of MA whenever he disagrees with a ruling, but it is Romney who doesn't understand the proper roles of divided government?

Perhaps you could point me to the provision of the Constitution of Massachusetts that obligates, or even allows, the Governor the Power to override both the Legislature and the Judiciary at will.

325 posted on 01/22/2008 1:05:38 PM PST by LexBaird (Behold, thou hast drinken of the Aide of Kool, and are lost unto Men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies ]

To: fluffdaddy

First, it was 4 fools.

Second, when the legislature passes a law, the executive can’t ignore it just because they think it’s a stupid law. I hope we can agree on that.

Third, the court ruled that the law on the books required same-sex marriage. That was the LAW, as passed by the legislature.

And to seal the deal, the court gave the legislature 180 days to fix the problem if they wanted to. In other words, six months to show the court they really meant to ban same-sex marriage.

The legislature did nothing. That validates the court ruling, and gives it the force of the legislature, not that this was necessary because our jurispudence DOES put the courts in charge.

If Romney had blocked marriage after the court ruled in favor of gays, the gays would have sued. They would have won injuntive releif. They would have won monetary damages. The state has no more ability to avoid paying in a civil case than you or I do. Eventually, Romney would be gone (he wasn’t going to win re-election), the democrats would take over, and have him thrown in jail for contempt of court.

Every day pro-life judges rule against pro-life principles, simply because they are following the rules of the Supreme Court. They actually have a RIGHT to rule differently, although if they do it and get overturned enough, eventually someone will probably recall them through impeachment like was done to Roy Moore.

That’s because they understand jurispudence.

If the legislature had acted to claim a ban on gay marriage, and the court had then ruled they hadn’t shown a compelling interest, maybe it would make sense for Romney to defy an order, although that is virtually unheard of.

But the legislature let stand the ruling that the Mass marriage law covered same-sex couples. That’s why nobody is winning any lawsuits fighting what some erroneously claim was an obviously illegal action by Romney.


327 posted on 01/22/2008 1:08:22 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson