Posted on 03/14/2025 11:22:22 AM PDT by Salman
BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — The North Dakota Senate on Thursday rejected a measure that would have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn its landmark 2015 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.
A vote to approve would have made North Dakota the first state to make such an overture to the high court, after the state House passed the measure last month.
The resolution failed in a 16-31 Senate vote after about 10 minutes of debate.
Democratic Sen. Josh Boschee said in opposition, “I understand that this puts us all in a tough spot, but I ask you to think about who’s put in the toughest position with this resolution: the people of North Dakota who are the subject of the resolution ... the gay and lesbian North Dakotans who did not ask to be the subject of this conversation, but the conversation was brought to us.”
Republican Sen. David Clemens supported the measure, saying that while the U.S. Constitution does not mention marriage, the North Dakota Constitution recognizes marriage as between a man and a woman. Clemens said he took an oath to uphold that document.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
A real test case would not be like this story. It would be a state passing a law defining marriage and then enforcing it. Then a homosexual couple seeking marriage would need to make a case.
What is the constitutional basis for the Supreme Court ruling in 2015 that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide?
If no sound constitutional basis, the ruling SHOULD be overturned and sent back to the states because same-sex marriage is a state’s issue.
Didn’t we see test cases years ago, when same sex couples were denied marriage licenses? And the result was that the Supreme Court overturned laws defining marriage?
Although federal law now allows same sex marriage. The Federal Respect for Marriage Act, passed in 2022, legalized same sex marriage by law, not just by a court case.
It will always be a challenge to both due process and equality before the law.
After Anthony Kennedy retired, I kept my eye out for his next public appearance.
Sure enough, he sat for a long interview on (IIRC) NPR.
He voted for fag marriage because he felt all children should enjoy the benefit of married parents.
As we all assumed, his decision had zero to do with the 14th Amendment.
D@mn these judicial tyrants to hell.
The purposefully badly-written 14th Amendment was a Civil War Reconstruction amendment and was ratified as such.
As with the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause, the Left has used the due process clause and equal protection clause to wrest the original intent of the Constitution (14A) which was to put former slaves as citizens on an equal footing with American citizens.
The RATIFERS of the amendment are the key to intent. The ratifiers meant the 14A to be a Civil War reconstruction amendment. It has nothing to do whatsoever with same-sex marriages.
How I hate the Left, and the Right better wake up and quit acquiescing to their lies and deceit.
The idiot/liars on the court said the 14th amendment requires it.
When discussing the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments, the word "ratified" should always be put into quotation marks, because denying all the citizens of the state the right to vote and appointing puppet governments that merely enacted whatever Washington DC *ORDERED* them to enact, is not a correct or legitimate constitutional process.
It is no different than the Vichy government in France who were Nazi puppets, or the Quisling government in Norway who was also a puppet of the Nazis.
*REAL* amendments require *REAL* ratification, being accepted by the "consent of the governed", and not put in place by external forces which are completely *AGAINST* the will of the people of a state.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof...shall be the supreme Law of the LandUS Const., Art. VI, Cl. 2.
ALL federal acts whether legislative or judicial are subject to the Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land.
Rather than supporting Leftist perversion of the Constitution ALWAYS to give more power to the gov't and to take away more of YOUR individual freedom, instead, let's start fighting for our God-given freedoms protected by the Constitution.
The 13th, 14th and 15th amendments still had to be ratified by 70% of the non-confederate states to be legally made part of the Constitution.
The confederate states IMO invalidly seceded from the union (using the Declaration of Independence as the standard), were not part of passing the reconstruction amendments, and then were made part of the Union.
Seems fair to me.
The idiot/liars are not a constitutional basis for a Court ruling.
The ill-compounded and hastily adopted homosexual marriage amendment, aka 14th.
The 14th amendment was passed soon after the civil war which was fought to give equal rights to homosexuals.
Any such test case is extremely unlikely to make it to the Supreme Court.
You need to reread the history of the 13th amendment. You have it wrong.
For one thing the amendment was considered ratified after Georgia became the 27th state to vote to adopt it. That happened December 6, 1865.
The 27 adopting states included North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee, Louisiana, Virginia and (as mentioned) Georgia.
Set aside for a moment the principle that consent obtained by coercion is not consent.
Of course. Nothing to do with birthright citizenship for children of illegals, either.
I was just answering your question.
Whoa. I didn’t know the former confederate states ratified the reconstruction amendments. I don’t know how that worked.
Regardless, the 14A is just another way for the lying deceitful Left to screw up application of the Constitution as written and originally understood and intended.
Let's see if this is correct. There were 36 states in the Union. It required 3/4ths to pass. So how many states were needed?
Well, .75 X 36 = 27 states minimum.
Well there were 11 confederate states. 36 - 11 is 25.
Without the fake "ratifications" of the coerced Southern states, it would not have passed.
The confederate states IMO invalidly seceded from the union (using the Declaration of Independence as the standard)
The document which explicitly says people can abolish the existing form of government and form another that suits them better? *THAT* "Declaration of Independence"?
Nothing invalid about states seceding. The Declaration expressly says they have the right to do this. It is the justification for the formation of our very own nation.
...were not part of passing the reconstruction amendments,
Uh, you don't know your history. They were absolutely *NECESSARY* to the passing of the "reconstruction" amendments.
Without their coerced votes provided by army guns pointing at their people, the 13th amendment would never have been ratified.
This is what dictatorships do.
It is the most common basis for all the bad decisions of the court.
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.