* * * Which Way? * * * ? ? http://www.appeal-democrat.com/articles/court-126493-supreme-california.html Letter: Supreme Court s ruling on PropositionMessage 1 of 1 , Jul 19View Source
* * * Which Way? * * *
? <------> ?
Letter: Supreme Court's ruling on Proposition 8 is baffling
After two decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court, I have concluded the best way to distinguish the difference between members of the Federal Judiciary and the political hacks serving our state and federal legislatures is that members of the Judiciary wear black robes.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal benefits could not be denied to members of the same sex who live in states that approve same sex marriages. This clearly indicates that states have the authority to define marriage. Apparently, California is the exception.
California voters voted to revise the State Constitution to define marriage as a union of a man and a woman. A Federal District Judge ruled Proposition 8 unconstitutional. I'm not clear which constitution the judge referenced. The 9th Circuit Court upheld the decision of the District Court Judge but issued a stay on the execution of the ruling until the issue was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court took a stance and punted back to the Circuit Court to lift the stay since our brave governor would not defend the vote of the people of California. On June 28, the Circuit Court complied with the order from the U.S. Supreme Court.
The effect of this action is two-fold. First, same sex marriages can now legally occur in California. Secondly, California cannot define marriage, even though several other States have tacitly received the U.S. Supreme Court blessing on the same issue.
Apparently, the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is recognized for some states, but not for others.
Houston W. Taylor, Sr.
Re: Resolving The Court's Conflict
By Ron Branson
National JAIL4Judges Commander-In-Chief
It has been pointed out that the decision of the Supreme Court cannot possible stand neither according to law, nor under the equal protection clause of the Constitution. So I would like to define this distorted reasoning of the Court.
First, the Court has determined on the one hand that each state may freely establish their own standard, and such standard is sacrosanct for all purposes pursuant to the Tenth Amendment, to wit; "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the People."
Secondly, the Court, by implication, has ruled that the Right of the People of California, through their Initiative Process, to wit; "All political power is inherent in the People ... they have the right to alter or reform it..." can be simply overruled by one man, i.e., the governor, who is without dispute, the lessor authority, and subservient to the People.
This, therefore, reduces down to the question, according to the Court, as to whether we have a government of the People, or a government of the government! The Court therefore challenges our Founding Fathers, to wit; "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
We therefore have a declared warfare between our Creator and His unalienable Rights granted to us, and their public servants, i.e., the government, which they specifically created solely to secure our God-given Rights. Said another way, it is a warfare of "The People v. The Courts." Such question regarding this basic conflict must be resolved. To aid in the resolution of this most basic of all disputes, is the JAIL4Judges Initiative, to wit; http://www.jail4judges.org/State_Chapters/ca/CA_Initiative.html
From this author's contention, there is absolutely no other way these God-given, unalienable Rights can be preserved for the future of America other than God's Way! And I believe I speak from a Higher Authority, for it is from God Himself Who, in His Divine faithfulness, has moved upon my heart to present to you this way of escape! The question remains, do we have ears to hear?