Texas' ban on gay marriage ruled unconstitutional

Houston Chronicle ^ | 2-26-2014

[C19fan]

Sorry to say this but the 10th Amendment from the viewpoint of the Federal Court is dead.

[JSDude1]

Maybe, but they’ll have a hard time enforcing the “gay marriages” come tax time or when dealing with the state, so liberals will ~still~ lose!

[pierrem15]

Do you think the Army would fire on Americans to enforce gay marriage?

[Ingtar]

Did they cite that portion of the Constitution where they believe it would give them to right to intervene?

[MeshugeMikey]

I understand that barry may have taken a liking to mr castro

[Amendment10]

... because the monstrous re-interpretation of the Commerce Clause has effectively given Fedzilla power over everything else.

Note that when FDR's activist justices decided Wickard v. Filburn in Congress's favor, they wrongly ignored that Thomas Jefferson and the Supreme Court had previously clarified that Congress has no Commerce Clause authority to interfere with intrastate commerce.

“For the power given to Congress by the Constitution does not extend to the internal regulation of the commerce of a State, (that is to say of the commerce between citizen and citizen,) which remain exclusively (emphasis added) with its own legislature; but to its external commerce only, that is to say, its commerce with another State, or with foreign nations, or with the Indian tribes.” –Thomas Jefferson, Jefferson’s Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank : 1791.

”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress. (emphases added)” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.

“Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description, as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state (emphasis added) and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass.” —Justice Barbour, New York v. Miln, 1837.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Do you think the Army would fire on Americans to enforce gay marriage?

Do you think the Army would have fired on Americans to enforce desegregation in 1957?

We don't know, because Gov. Faubus blinked. If it came to it, I think Texas would blink now as well.

[Gene Eric]

One individual overrules the will of the state?

[pierrem15]

Yes-- only 12 years after 1945 and 4 after the Korean War, and Eisenhower former SHAEF commander.

Obama is no Eisenhower, and the military is professional now, not Cold War draftee.

The officers and men have a much better understanding of the Constitution than the judiciary, and I tend to think they would sit out any such conflict, telling His Royal High-ness that this is a political dispute.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Anyone have the bio on this black-robed tyrant?

Garcia, Orlando Luis
Born 1952 in Jim Wells County, TX

Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U.S. District Court, Western District of Texas
Nominated by William J. Clinton on November 19, 1993, to a seat vacated by Emilio M. Garza. Confirmed by the Senate on March 10, 1994, and received commission on March 11, 1994.

Education:
University of Texas, B.A., 1975
University of Texas School of Law, J.D., 1978

Professional Career:
Private practice, San Antonio, Texas, 1978-1990
State representative, Texas, 1983-1991
Justice, Fourth Court of Appeals of Texas, 1991-1992

[pierrem15]

Yup- Wickard is probably even worse than Dred Scott, because it effectively annihilated everyone's property rights as well as state authority.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Did they cite that portion of the Constitution where they believe it would give them to right to intervene?

Equal Protection Clause, 14th Amendment.

[Svartalfiar]

Nationwide, seven states have struck down same-sex marriage bans, in whole or in part, in the past 65 days. But every state, including now Texas, has a stay in effect leaving the laws in place until the issue is visited by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Sorry, but this author doesn't use words that mean what he thinks they mean. Seven states have NOT struck down the bans. They have had the bans struck down by federal judges. HUGE difference.

[Ingtar]

Even if one of the provisions applied, which they do not, Congress is the body given the right to address the deficiency, not the courts.

[Arrowhead1952]

One lesbian couple had to go to Massachusetts to get married, and they want Texas to recognize the union.

I think it's time to leave the union and kick out all liberals and illegal invaders.

[JSDude1]

I don’t give a damn about the courts, the State government of Texas ought to say “Remember the 10th Amendment? The hell with you (Federal Courts), we won’t comply”!!

[Deo volente]

People however, should note that you hear or have heard about NOTHING from the GOP, the so called opposition party, to stand up for the rights of states.

The Constitution and the rule of law are way down on Boehner's list of priorities. He has precious time left after managing his wine, cigarettes, tan, and his golf game.

[SpinnerWebb]

Being from Kansas, you will still need to submit your 38% windfall profit tax back to Texas.

Make that payable to “SpinnerWebb”.

As we say in Texas... “Gracias”!

[Conscience of a Conservative]

That's why I fully expect the SCOTUS to do another Roe v. Wade on this issue. My only real doubt is how soon.

I think you're exactly right, and I think it's going to happen sooner rather than later. I wouldn't be surprised if it happens as soon as the Supreme Court's October 2014 term.

One key difference between this and Roe, though, is that once the Court throws open the door to same-sex "marriage," it will be much, much tougher to fight back against than abortion was.

[fwdude]

Maybe, but they’ll have a hard time enforcing the “gay marriages” come tax time or when dealing with the state, so liberals will ~still~ lose!

There is no income tax in Texas, and in other aspects, the federal government, with its tentacles extending into just about every benefit we have, WILL grant them benefits, at the point of a sword (toward us.)

It's good that a stay was issued - which indicates that the appellants have a good chance of winning. But that won't prevent a few rogue idiots in Austin from breaching the law, and the stay.