Posted on 09/04/2015 6:22:52 PM PDT by Kid Shelleen
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest gave reporters who questioned him about President Obama’s reaction to the case:
“I will just say on principle that the success of our democracy depends on the rule of law and there is no public official that is above the rule of law,” Earnest said. “Certainly not the President of the United States. But neither is the Rowan county clerk. That’s a principle that is enshrined in our Constitution and in our democracy.”
Earnest admitted that he did not have a specific reaction about the case from President Obama, and pointed out that the legal case was ongoing.
He neglected to mention Obama’s history of questionable legal decisions, which critics argue are a direct affront to the Constitution
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
"I only did what I was ordered to do. Nicht schuldig!"
I know - they all went into hiding after JR's post yesterday
I've been arguing with a bunch of them all day and only one got the zot.
What rule of law? the Judge’s unlawful edict or the lack of a law (that was struck down by SCOTUS) to follow?
Charlie Rangel.
Bullshit! If this was the case, the occupier of the White House, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Eric Holders to name a few would be in prison.
No man made law is above God’s law.
>>>There are still a lot of Freepers here who would say “amen”<<<
Amen to what?
I think that no Public Officials are above the Law, don’t you? It’s just hilarious hearing anyone in the Obama Regime saying it with a straight face.
If the Courts make up the law rather than simply interpret it, then public officials have a DUTY to disobey it.
Public officials are answerable only to the constitution, duly enacted statutes and the people who elect them. The courts are currently out of control and are acting in ways that are contrary to the constitution and the will of the people.
It takes a lot of courage for Kim Davis to stand against the entire Federal Judiciary. I stand with Kim Davis.
OH, LOL! Thank you. That made my night!
The gay Prez couldn’t talk with Reggie’s d*ck is his mouth...
The Federal Judiciary is corrupt, we all know that.
What other decisions by the SCOTUS can be ignored without revising the Constitution? Just the ones Conservatives disagree with, or ones that are judged unpopular by a Majority of the American People?
If the Clerk was of a member of the Jewish Faith and had no problem with Gays Marrying, would this even be an issue?
What if she was a Muslim and didn’t want to issue a License to a Jew who was Marrying a Muslim, then what? I’m just asking the question. The Court has expanded the definition of Civil Rights, whether we agree or not.
IMHO, the Tenth Amendment was eviscerated to make the Federalization of Gay Marriage happen and I an still disgusted by it. They singlehandedly destroyed the backbone of our Republic, States Rights.
The best part of this is that the Clerk is a Democrat who is now hated by other Democrats. If only they could hate Hillary Clinton and Obama as much.
Outside of Amending the Constitution, Impeachment of Jurists or Armed Revolution supported by a Majority of the Citizenry, how can ignoring perceived unjust Laws be accomplished? Who defines the line between Political Activism and Anarchy? Again, it is just a question.
Well, maybe waiting for certain SCOTUS Jurists to Die and having a President who respects every word of the Constitution it can happen, but it will take more time than most of us have left on the Earth.
Having a Duty to disobey a Law you personally disagree with, like paying the IRS for instance, usually lands you in Jail. She is playing with Fire, that’s for sure.
I have no idea if this will end well for the Clerk, but she would be a true Political Prisoner.
I know she is in an Elected Position, so many things are in play if a majority of the local Electorate supports her actions.
Although I disagree with her method which I have stated previously, I hope she is successful as I do the People in North Carolina doing the same thing. This could be defining moment in the battle for Local and States Rights.
I assume Obama will send in the National Guard next to quell such dissent should things get dicey. Nothing would surprise me in this day and age in Obamaville.
We will see how this all ends up, no matter our opinions on the subject.
Where is it written that the County Clerk in Kentucky is required to issue a marriage license to anyone other than a single man and a single woman?
Kim Davis is following THE LAW. The courts are following unconstitutional opinions of unelected tyrants.
Jury nullification.
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.