Meet Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, asshole of the week. Yesterday he ordered all state probate judges NOT to issue any marriage licenses to same-sex couples on the grounds that the Supreme Court ruling of last year only applies to the four states who were represented in that case. This idea is based on his belief that only the states have the right to define "marriage".
According to Roy's logic, only those arrested in Arizona must be read their Miranda rights and that black kids must be allowed in white schools, only in Kansas.
Look, I'm usually a states-rights guy but when the Supreme Court weighs in on a topic, it's pretty much the law of the land sooner or later, like it or not.
Moore hasn't been on TV for a while bleating about the ten commandments in his courthouse or whatever, so this is how he stays relevant to the dumb hillbillies who voted for him as Chief Justice.
The last thing Alabama needs is a renegade hick in a position of power, on TV, tilting at the same-sex windmill, making the state look more backward than everybody believes it already is.
6 comments:
The SCOTUS has the final word on laws because in Marbury vs Madison the SCOTUS said they have the final word on laws.
Judicial review is real. Without it how is the supreme court not a third branch of government? What would their function be?
I just gave the history. Do you have a better explanation?
My point is that the Court has authority because our system grants them legitimacy. Every time they make a decision that seems politically driven - something that happens more and more frequently - they forfeit some legitimacy.
If Mrs. Clinton is elected, a SCOTUS could make the 2nd Amendment meaningless within a few years. It would be a political decision, and if politicians act on their newly granted power, all hell will break lose in the country.
The SCOTUS needs to go back to interpreting the Cnstitution, not mining it for previously undiscovered gems that are pretty to the eye.
Judge Moore's quixotic orders will have little effect.
You are right Bill. When presidents appoint, with only perfunctory senate review, obviously political judges to the bench, especially the supreme court, political agendas become law, regardless of how wrong.
That said, if liberal judges are appointed by elected liberal presidents, that means that the country has shifted leftward and that's what we want. That's how the system was designed.
What's wrong is the politicians flooding the electorate with indigent immigrants and a massive welfare class to the point that only liberal presidents can ever be elected.
The system is a good one, but the politicians are the bad guys.
Liberal presidents appoint committed liberals who stay that way.
Conservative presidents seem to appoint with about a 50% success rate.
Post a Comment