Posted on 05/26/2009 10:32:04 AM PDT by P-Marlowe
The brief version, before you click on it, appears very strange.?
Gremlins
LOL!! On the “Latest Articles” page, with all those A-A-A-As present, one would think 0bama was trying to recite something besides his name from memory.
At least you managed to keep the paragraph-breaks.
The poor DUmmies are having a see-saw day emotionally, first up they were so happy Obama when hit one out of the park with his choice for SC, now their poor little heads are about to explode over their pet cause setback in Ca.
Why do they have to cut down a tree to say Prop 8 upheld?
And your post chewed up bandwidth for what...?
Legal Beagle Alert
Legal Analysis.
I’d love to see the arguments for and against a lawsuit alleging that the Paperwork Reduction Act notice violates Constitutional separation of powers, due process, ex post facto, and freedom of press and freedom of speech issues. ;)
The ruling ought not exceed 2,000 pages.
When you read 100 year old Supreme Court cases you are flabbergasted at how concise they were.
The problem is that these are NOT legal decisions, but political decisions.
When you start legislating from the bench, you sometimes have to write a 1000 page opinion to justify your actions. When you stand solely on the Constitution, your opinion ought to be pretty short.
A more sensible comment has never been posted! It's too bad the justices aren't reading it!!!!!!!!
In addressing the issues now presented in the third chapter of this narrative, it is important at the outset to emphasize a number of significant points. First, as explained in the Marriage Cases, supra, 43 Cal.4th at page 780, our task in the present proceeding is not to determine whether the provision at issue is wise or sound as a matter of policy or whether we, as individuals, believe it should be a part of the California Constitution. Regardless of our views as individuals on this question of policy, we recognize as judges and as a court our responsibility to confine our consideration to a determination of the constitutional validity and legal effect of the measure in question. It bears emphasis in this regard that our role is limited to interpreting and applying the principles and rules embodied in the California Constitution, setting aside our own personal beliefs and values.
Would you want this little gem left out, in the interest of brevity? It expresses an understanding, by the SCOC, of a premise that the current nominee to the SCOTUS cannot grasp.
And I quote, "It bears emphasis in this regard that our role is limited to interpreting and applying the principles and rules embodied in the California Constitution, setting aside our own personal beliefs and values."
While this references the California Constitution, the premise is identical to that covered in the U.S. Constitution.
Good for the SCOC! Bad for the nominee Judge Sonia Sonomayor.
There are a lot of SAAAD liberals in California today! This is great news!
Even though that court is made up of liberal nut jobs, they couldn’t deny the legality of Prop 8. Ken Star deserves a lot of credit for devastating the homosexual militants in the courtroom.
Moreno needs to be recalled NOW.
The liberals, I’m sorry to say, don’t look at these legal issues properly. The issues before the court this time were fundamentally different than before. In the previous case, the court was ruling whether it was legal to deny same-sex couples the title marriage. This time, they were ruling on whether it was legal and proper for voters to vote on a constitutional amendment defining marriage.
The liberals just don’t see nuances sometimes. But this is an important nuance. I know they want gay marriage and they want it now. But getting what they want had blinded them to interpretations of legal procedures.
The judges didn’t rule against same-sex marriage today. They ruled that it was legal and proper to amend the constitution to define marriage. But that is lost on the activists on the issue.
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.