Posted on 09/04/2015 9:57:10 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
We’re in a weird place as a party when Trump, the would-be strongman who’s going to smash sclerotic American government as we know it, is more of a “rule of law” guy than Ted Cruz is. And way, way more of one than Mike Huckabee is.
Trump prefers an accommodation in which gay couples can get their licenses, as the Obergefell ruling requires, and Davis can opt out so that she’s not involved in something that violates her religious beliefs. But she doesn’t want to opt out. She wants to force the whole office to opt out by forbidding her deputies from issuing licenses without her approval. As recently as yesterday, during her contempt hearing, her lawyers were warning people that marriage licenses issued today by her staff (there have already been two as of 10:30 a.m. ET) while she’s in jail won’t be valid because they lack her signature as county clerk — and she might not be wrong about that. What she’s doing, as Charles Cooke put it, isn’t so much seeking a conscientious objection for herself as demanding a right of secession for Rowan County from the post-Obergefell legal regime. Cruz and Huckabee seem okay with that. Trump evidently isn’t.
“The other simple answer is rather than going through this, [because] it’s really a very, very sticky situation, a terrible situation — 30 miles away they have other places, they have many other places where you get licensed, and you have them actually quite nearby,” Mr. Trump said. “That’s another alternative. I hate to see her being put in jail. I understand what they’re doing. It would be certainly nice if she didn’t do it, but other people in her office do it but from what I understand she won’t allow other people in her office to do it.”
Bottom line, host Joe Scarborough said, is that if Supreme Court makes a decision, that’s the law of land, right?
“You have to go with it,” Mr. Trump said. “The decision’s been made, and that is the law of the land.”…
“She can take a pass and let somebody else in the office do it in terms of religious, so you know, it’s a very … tough situation, but we are a nation, as I said yesterday, we’re a nation of laws,” he said. “And I was talking about borders and I was talking about other things, but you know, it applies to this, also, and the Supreme Court has ruled. It would be nice to have other people in her office do what they have to do.”
Smart point, but the Cruz/Huckabee take on this is that a “lawless” Supreme Court opinion doesn’t count as “law” the way a statute does. Cruz, at least, knows better, but it’s in his political interest to push that argument. I’m curious to see if he comes after Trump over this at one of the debates, sensing that it’s a rare chance for him to out-populist Mr. Populism. If he does, Trump should come back: Who gets to decide which court opinions are sufficiently “lawless” that they needn’t be enforced? We’re left with Trump, the alleged revolutionary, standing up for the long tradition of judicial review while more mainstream GOP pols argue that that tradition has been so discredited by left-wing double standards that conservatives should take the same a la carte approach to law enforcement. Let every county clerk go their own way. In hindsight, Obama should have cited his, ahem, deep religious convictions as grounds for granting executive amnesty.
Exit question via a Twitter buddy: How come no one’s standing up for the conscience rights of Davis’s deputy clerks? What if one of them enthusiastically supports gay marriage and wants to issue licenses in Davis’s stead? The state’s telling Davis that she has a duty to obey Supreme Court rulings and she’s telling her deputies that they have a duty to obey her personal religious beliefs. Why is the former less legitimate than the latter?
Well, that settles it.Not a single candidate believes in following the Constitution.
Sure he gets it. He watched 70 million people throw their integrity under the bus to vote Romney. He knows they will do so again.
Yuck. This issue is going to divide the GOP, while the left laughs.
There are two ways to react to this situation.
One is the rule of law. There is a legal process to turn it around. We have to elect Senators that will impeach Supreme court Justices. Or we elect Presidents that will appoint good judges and wait for the bad ones to die. Or we elect congressmen that will take marriage out of the jurisdiction of the courts.
The second way is rebellion. Whether civil disobedience such as the KY Clerk has chosen. Or protests. Or even armed rebellion.
Ted Cruz has called for the second method. And I respect that. I just don’t think it will work. It won’t work directly...the justices aren’t going to change their mind. It might work indirectly, her martrydom could arouse the awareness of the citizenry to vote out the rinos.
Trump had already downplayed the whole issue. When asked, he supported traditional marriage and stated gay rights wasn’t his thing. This issue is not what Trump wants to campaign on. I’m not surprised that at all that Trump responded “Rule of law”. Though I was hoping he would pull out a novel and genius approach that we could all get behind.
Trump and Cruz both need to take it one step further. They need to charge the citizenry, that if you want the law changed, elect congressmen that will hold the justices accountable and change it. We need a grass roots campaign to impeach the justices.
Other than that, I think Trump should stay clear of this issue. We need him to win to fix the other issues. No one is going to fix this one without Congressional action.
Yuck. This issue is going to divide the GOP, while the left laughs.
There are two ways to react to this situation.
One is the rule of law. There is a legal process to turn it around. We have to elect Senators that will impeach Supreme court Justices. Or we elect Presidents that will appoint good judges and wait for the bad ones to die. Or we elect congressmen that will take marriage out of the jurisdiction of the courts.
The second way is rebellion. Whether civil disobedience such as the KY Clerk has chosen. Or protests. Or even armed rebellion.
Ted Cruz has called for the second method. And I respect that. I just don’t think it will work. It won’t work directly...the justices aren’t going to change their mind. It might work indirectly, her martrydom could arouse the awareness of the citizenry to vote out the rinos.
Trump had already downplayed the whole issue. When asked, he supported traditional marriage and stated gay rights wasn’t his thing. This issue is not what Trump wants to campaign on. I’m not surprised that at all that Trump responded “Rule of law”. Though I was hoping he would pull out a novel and genius approach that we could all get behind.
Trump and Cruz both need to take it one step further. They need to charge the citizenry, that if you want the law changed, elect congressmen that will hold the justices accountable and change it. We need a grass roots campaign to impeach the justices.
Other than that, I think Trump should stay clear of this issue. We need him to win to fix the other issues. No one is going to fix this one without Congressional action.
Mr. Trump had better educate himself and recant that remark and get on the side of the US Constitution and quit weaseling out of such by siding with illegal and corrupt court rulings. That’s not going to cut it.
Quite the contrary - they want Hillary to ‘change tone’ to ‘apologize with feeling’... and the usual crap the elites grant to each other.
How about one standard for all of us
This is exactly why I never invest my hopes in one individual candidate. I’ve lived long enough to be disappointed too many times to count.
RE: Well, that settles it.Not a single candidate believes in following the Constitution.
NOT REALLY. SEE THIS THREAD:
Here are the Presidential Candidate’s stance on Kim Davis
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3333016/posts
Trump is going to lose a lot of support by joining the dark side in its’ war against Christians. This is going to cost him dearly. Epic fail. As bad as Cruz supporting TPA. Cruz managed to walk that back some what. Trump better start walking this back pronto.
OK, as previous responses ask, "What law is being broken?" At best she is following existing KY statues by not issuing a license for a same sex couple. At worst, she is following the SCOTUS ruling by not issuing ANY marriage licenses, because it ruled that KY's existing law is unconstitutional. Either way, this is a clear case of a Christian being targeted by homosexual activists and federal judicial overreach. Trump's answer clearly shows he doesn't see it that way.
Kim Davis just stopped the Trump express.
That’s what some of us have been saying for quite some time. Trump is a “deal-maker” that requires political skills. We are all being taken for a ship of fools. He is catering to the sodomite vote.
Trump is absolutely wrong on this. He needs educated. Just because the Supreme Court rules something doesn’t make it the law. The courts can not make law.
I don't have a problem with this.
Trump isn't a social conservative so I'm not going to be disappointed when he doesn't act like one.
Trump is the only candidate running that wants to do something to stop the exporting of jobs and the importing of criminals. As far as I'm concerned, these are greater threats to this country than gay marriage.
I'm a trump supporter, HOWEVER, if he tried to shove this crap down Alabamans' throats he'd drop better than half his following there.
My point: People like him because he speaks out.
He's not saying much if anything on this issue and Ted Cruz IS.
http://news.yahoo.com/trump-republican-pledge-breaks-pack-iran-gay-marriage-131002899.html
Trump says he will work with Iran deal
Says Gay Marriage is law of land and should be obeyed
some revolutionary
Its NOT the law. It was an abuse of power. Courts can not make law.
Sending a woman for obeying her Christian conscience will sure “Make America Great, Again!”
What horse s*t.
We shall see. “We are a nation of laws,” is kind of his catchphrase.
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.