Comments on: California Court Overturns Gay Marriage Ban

By: thatsrightnate

thatsrightnate — Sat, 17 May 2008 00:58:15 +0000

I do not believe the Supreme Court should be able to overturn the will of the people in cases other than Presidential elections. I also do not believe that homosexuals should be granted special rights because of their sexual orientation.

By: zenyenta

zenyenta — Fri, 16 May 2008 23:36:23 +0000

Don’t worry, Nate. The decision doesn’t mean you’re required to get gay married if you don’t want to. You have to read the whole thing.

By: karen

karen — Fri, 16 May 2008 15:21:18 +0000

In other words, argue against the legal logic of their decision (just try!), or argue whether this particular court has jurisdiction over this particular question (they do!). Those are the only two ways this court could be considered out of line or “activist” – if the legal reasoning is nonsense or if they do not, in fact, legally have the authority to decide this question that was put in front of them.

Either that, or go back in time and change the whole structure of our government so that the mob always wins! That would would be totally awesome.

By: karen

karen — Fri, 16 May 2008 15:11:34 +0000

“Overturning the will of the people” – at least when that will is contrary to the stated constitutional principles of this nation/the state – is, in fact, the JOB of the judicial branch. It is the main reason for its existence: to act as a CHECK on the legislative and executive branches.

If the people had voted to outlaw all guns, and the court had overturned that on the basis of the 2nd amendment, you would be singing a different tune. Sour grapes, that’s all this whole “waaaahhh, activist judges!” thing is.