Full Title:
Why Kim Davis’s refusal to issue same-sex marriage licenses is legally different from a ‘sanctuary city’s’ refusal to cooperate with federal immigration law
The author is wrong. At no time has any court upheld the right of nullification by a state or local government. Now you may try to use weasel words and say not enforcing is different than nullification, but the end result is the same. If we extend this logic further we could have a city or state that allows for fully automatic weapons in direct defiance to the AYF. I wonder how long the left would defend that legal “right”
Correct: the existence of “sanctuary cities” results in the MURDER of American citizens.
Kim Davis’ activity does not.
And which federal law is that?
The only difference IF what he says is correct is that Kim Davis gets thrown in jail and the rogues of sanctuary cities get way with breaking federal laws they disagree with without punishment. Some difference. Jail the little person.
> “the Supremacy Clause provides that state laws must yield when they conflict with federal law.”
What federal law?
There is no federal marriage law, marriage laws have always been within the purview of the States. The people of Kentucky have decided that marriage is between man & woman.
The USSC has no authority to commandeer the legislative process of the States, Kentucky can not be forced to issue marriage licenses contrary to its laws or to have it’s laws written for them by the federal Supreme Court.
So how come when Jan Brewer decides to enforce the border and require identification in Arizona do the feds file a lawsuit over civil rights violations and creating a patchwork of immigration laws.
Holder said there can only be one law of the land when it comes to immigration, and it’s the federal govt that overrides state law.
That Tennessee judge said Tennessee currently has no marriage law; if that was the effect of the Supreme Court ruling, that is , to strike down as unconstitutional any existing state laws written defining marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman, then Kentucky has no marriage law either.
She’s upholding Kentucky’s constitution which contains a ban on same-sex marriages. The Federal government has no jurisdiction in marriage licensing since that is a power held only by each state. If a state has the power to ban marriage between siblings based on health risks, it has the power to ban any other type of health-risky union. The Federal government has no such power and yet it forces states to authorize marriage to an unequally protected group.
At the same time the federal government cannot dictate that state and local officials enforce that law on the federal government’s behalf.
Doesn't that exactly describe Kim Davis' situation? In fact, she isn't even opposing a lawn per se. She's opposing one ruling from SCOTUS that government is implementing as a wide-ranging law.
More importantly, she is standing up as someone who supports the Word of God, and Jesus as Lord.
There is no law, simply an opinion by five justices who do not make law.
Is it legally different from our Attorney General refusing to defend our duly passed propositions? It was their sworn duty to defend our illegal aliens prop, and our no homo marriage prop, and they refused.
No one seemed to mind.
What Federal law is Kim defying? Certainly not any federal marriage law passed by congress. She’s in jail for contempt of court. Judges can jail you for contempt if they don’t like your tie.
Ya, it is different.
Nothing Kim Davis has done has gotten people brutalized, raped and/or killed.
Moron.
Amusing reasoning, especially when the black-robed thug is trying to commandeer the local County Clerk to implement a federal demand that jurisdictions pretend gay "marriage" has something to do with real marriage. These people don't even care about sounding objective; they just demand absolute obedience to Big Government. Liberals and their journalists disgust me.