With Prop 8 now overturned in California, will the Federal government intervene like they did in Arizona since it contravenes its own laws?
The interesting thing for me is the notion of "tyranny of the majority." Seen through the eyes of a democracy, the judges decision can be interpreted as a counter balance to it since the majority of people are against legalizing gay marriage in California. They are more in favor of legalizing pot.
Arizona. California. Messy stuff when it comes to State vs. Federal legalities.
Our Republic has many built in checks against the raw rule of the majority on control by a minority. The House and Senate arrangement, the electoral college, the division of government into three fairly independent branches, and a written, published constitution.
ReplyDeleteThe Judge (e Republican appointee btw.) found no compelling reason to deny marriage licences and the benefits of marriage to gay couples.
Allowing "majority rule" unfettered reign is a recipe for disaster. Think Jim Crow law for example.
Yes, the checks and balances. Good point. That's why they pay you the big bucks.
ReplyDeleteI suspect, if you're not an ideologue, the judge did the right thing here.