CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
That marriage laws can only be protected by a constitutional amendment is a great example of how the legislative and executive branches are in defensive mode against the courts. We're living in a time where the people have to put together a supermajority to protect an institution because a few powerful judges can do as they wish with the law.
But even a constitutional amendment isn't a guarantee of anything. Political Correctness on government funded college campuses has all but ruined the free exchange of ideas that were supposed to be the basis of the First Amendment. The arbitrary ban on assault weapons, guns that were used in less than 2% of crimes but look scary, is an infringement of the second amendment. The tenth amendment plan for the federal government to leave state governments alone was gone with the New Deal.
Speaking of the Tenth Amendment, I've heard a lot of liberals argue the Tenth Amendment when it comes to gay marriage. They don't ever make this argument for abortion, though it's a natural for the Tenth. States like California and Mass. are passing laws that forbid gay marriage, and they are being ignored by the courts in those states. The courts won't leave anyone alone.
It's the downfall of decisions like Brown versus the Board of Education. The court was right that there was a problem with school integration, but they overstepped their boundaries by trying to fix the problem themselves. You can get tired and weary of the slow going legislative branch, but they're elected and answer to the people. What kind of representative government do we have if the legislative body is ignored in favor of an unelected minority?
When bodies are allowed to overstep to solve a "crisis" they only have to suggest a crisis the next time they want to overstep. Now our elected representatives think they have to propose amendments to the constitution to stave off anticipated decisions from courts that they fear. Why is it that the courts are so much wiser? Can't they make bad decisions?
The court in Kerry country is ready to ignore the law passed by the legislature. The California courts won't uphold the marriage protection law. Instead they're allowing the fiasco continue in San Francisco against the referendum passed by the citizens. The legislative branches will probably enact some sort of civil union compromise that will solve the problem if the courts focus on upholding the laws on the books. Where are all the critics of Judge Roy Moore now?
Why do the people who refused to let the United Nations set American policy allow unelected judges to write legislation from the bench? Isn't that why we got rid of the king?
