Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Kaslin

DOMA is unconstitutional but not for the reason Tauro cites. Regulating marriage is not an enumerated power specifically listed in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution. Therefore that is a right reserved to the states per the 10th Amendment.


6 posted on 07/13/2010 9:54:15 AM PDT by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Man50D
"DOMA is unconstitutional but not for the reason Tauro cites. Regulating marriage is not an enumerated power specifically listed in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution. Therefore that is a right reserved to the states per the 10th Amendment."

No, Tauro makes that very assertion in Massachusetts v. HHS, which was one of the two companion suits that he issued his opinion on.

12 posted on 07/13/2010 10:09:06 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D
DOMA is unconstitutional but not for the reason Tauro cites. Regulating marriage is not an enumerated power specifically listed in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution. Therefore that is a right reserved to the states per the 10th Amendment.

And the states do have the right to regulate marraige, the same as they can regulate the production, distribution, and consumption of alcohol. It doesn't mean that states have the right to REDEFINE the chemical composition of an alcohol molecule. There are some things that the states can define inivdually, but there are some things the we need define as a nation; one single, common definition. Marraige is one of those things.

21 posted on 07/13/2010 10:22:54 AM PDT by NurdlyPeon (Sarah Palin: America's last, best hope for survival.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson