[tpaine]

The town did what it wanted to do through its democratically elected representatives.

The representatives have no constitutional power to dictate who can live together as a family, and have sworn an oath to support the US Constitution as our supreme law. -- Thus they are restricted in this instance to reasonably regulating zoning issues, health & safety codes, etc.

If people don't like it they can either campaign to replace the council members or move.

Or, -- they can petition for redress against an unconstitutional law. [see the 1st]
This they will do, and win...

Frankly, unless one lives in the community it is none of their business.

Frankly, defending liberty is everyones business.

[Diamond]

The representatives have no constitutional power to dictate who can live together as a family

1. Define "family".
2. The representative's are not even purporting to dictate who can live together as a family. They have simply legislated certain occupancy requirements for living in Black Jack. There is no requirement for these people to live in Black Jack. There is, however, a legal defintion of the word "family". The burden of proof is on the one who wants to change it.

they can petition for redress against an unconstitutional law. [see the 1st] This they will do, and win...

Yes, they can, but they will probably not win. See #65.

defending liberty is everyones business.

Define "liberty".

Cordially,

[MBB1984]

Sorry, but there is nothing in the US Constitution stating that a local municipality cannot restrict who can live together. If I am wrong, please cite the applicable amendment. There might be some Federal legislation in this area, but I doubt it.

The Constitution only gives certain limited rights to its citizens to make them self governing or at least that was the intent of the Founders. It is up to the people to take it from there. The Constitution was not designed to offer protection and redress from the Courts against every silly law.