Quote:
Originally Posted by Vendzilla
I don't know anything about this judge, but I have a problem with having something overturned by one person that got a majority vote,twice, it allows for corruption of power.
|
I've asked you this rhetorical question before, I'll ask you again: if the voters of any given state voted to outlaw guns in their state, entirely, and a federal court later overturned the law on the basis that it violated the 2nd Amendment, would you have a problem with the court's decision?
Personally, I would not have a problem with the court overruling the voters in that hypothetical, because the court would be quite right, based not only on a reasonable interpretation of the plain language of the 2nd Amendment, but upon the prevailing federal case law that governs this area of jurisprudence.
It works the same way with the 14th Amendment. If you read this judge's opinion, you'll find that he did not just pull this out of his ass; it is founded upon a very well reasoned reading of the 14th Amendment, and a HEAP of case law, including
Loving v. Virginia, a case that a lot Constitutional scholars have long pointed to as the eventual undoing of the prohibition of same sex marriage.
Having said all that... this isn't over. From here, the case will move on to the 9th Circuit for review, and regardless of which side wins, the losing side will then petition the Supreme Court for certorari.
This should not be objectionable to you in the least, my good man... it is simply
how our system of Constitutional law works.
IMO, it is a fine system.... right up there with the best the world has to offer.