Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
All of what I have written makes excellent sense and eviscerates your nonsensical posting.
Windsor did not uphold Prop 8, quite the opposite. Windsor did uphold states rights to regulate marriage within the boundaries of the Constitution. Windsor also put the states on notice that SCOTUS retains the authority to end Windsor, modify it, or leave it in place.
The California legislature, since Prop 8 has been judicially executed, to erase the language. The lege has paralyzed it, sedated it, and is administering metaphorically a drug that is buring out the veins of Prop 8 so that it can never be resurrected. Dead initiatives can be overridden by the lege; nothing forbids it.
In other words, because SCOTUS has so opined, no private citizen has any standing to bring suit on behaf of the dead Prop 8, only the lawful administrators of the state's judicial system. Your interpretation of Art II, Sec 10 (c) is spurious as they come. File suit with that argument, your case will be summarily dismissed and you will be warned any more such flippancy will be met with contempt of court findings and fines.
We all understand that you have whined; continue it in court, you will be fined.
No one but you cares...
So I'm the ONLY person in the United States who cares that state by state [always starting the trend in California] people are going to have their rights to self-govern removed by the LGBT cult?
Just one person in the entire US eh?
All of what I have written makes excellent sense and eviscerates your nonsensical posting.
Windsor did not uphold Prop 8, quite the opposite. Windsor did uphold states rights to regulate marriage within the boundaries of the Constitution. Windsor also put the states on notice that SCOTUS retains the authority to end Windsor, modify it, or leave it in place.
The California legislature, since Prop 8 has been judicially executed, to erase the language. The lege has paralyzed it, sedated it, and is administering metaphorically a drug that is buring out the veins of Prop 8 so that it can never be resurrected. Dead initiatives can be overridden by the lege; nothing forbids it.
In other words, because SCOTUS has so opined, no private citizen has any standing to bring suit on behaf of the dead Prop 8, only the lawful administrators of the state's judicial system. Your interpretation of Art II, Sec 10 (c) is spurious as they come. File suit with that argument, your case will be summarily dismissed and you will be warned any more such flippancy will be met with contempt of court findings and fines.
We all understand that you have whined; continue it in court, you will be fined.
Sounds just like a lawyer worried about the opposition's true merit..... & smack talking a difficult case to try to kill it in the cradle. It's not whether you are making sense. It's if rogue officials in CA are acting legally or not. According to the CA constitution they are not. Ergo electors there have grounds & standing to stop sedition.
The will of the people of California was no gay marriage and the looney left and the fags didn't like it, not American but tyrannical. Idiot lefty twits.No kangaroo courts or judges, Sil, in California.
You could have six billion people opposed to marriage equality, which mean nothing since the Constitution guarantees due process to all Americans equally. Uber democratic rule is meaningless in the face of the Constitution. Your strange and false equivalency of a rape victim being subject to the legal authority that makes decisions indicates just how far you are reaching on this issue.
Once again, you have no standing as a private citizen: SCOTUS made this very clear.
No lawyer, good or bad, would argue such silliness before SCOTUS.
How about the voters rights who won the vote the American way? Oh but right, gys and the left are unAmerican. IDIOTS!!!!No one has removed your right to self govern, Sil.
You have every right to vote, campaign, send loud letters to SCOTUS and the Cali lege.
However, your right to self-govern cannot talk away folks' right to marriage equality.
How about the voters rights who won the vote the American way? Oh but right, gys and the left are unAmerican. IDIOTS!!!!No one has removed your right to self govern, Sil.
You have every right to vote, campaign, send loud letters to SCOTUS and the Cali lege.
However, your right to self-govern cannot talk away folks' right to marriage equality.
Hey idiot, you stfu, I ain't stepping on anyones rights. I just pointed out that the voters of calisfornia voted and then because of a bunch of cry baby heathens their vote was thrown out. IDIOTS!!!!How about the voters rights who won the vote the American way? Oh but right, gys and the left are unAmerican. IDIOTS!!!!No one has removed your right to self govern, Sil.
You have every right to vote, campaign, send loud letters to SCOTUS and the Cali lege.
However, your right to self-govern cannot talk away folks' right to marriage equality.
Well, take it up with 17 states, D.C., 22 straight court decisions, etc.
AF, you don't get to deny others their civil rights.
In no way have your personal and religious liberties in any way shape or form been injured. So, politely, your are going to be told to STFU until you can show a compelling interest of your "injury" because of marriage equality: hint, there is none.
According to the Constitution, the lege is acting legitimately, and opposition such as yours is in fact rogue.
It's remarkable how comprehensive your ignorance is, you're as clueless about 'Fascism' as the Windsor ruling.Fascists Leaders in California Sense The Future: Attempt Another Coup on Democracy
Hey idiot, you stfu, I ain't stepping on anyones rights. I just pointed out that the voters of calisfornia voted and then because of a bunch of cry baby heathens their vote was thrown out. IDIOTS!!!!How about the voters rights who won the vote the American way? Oh but right, gys and the left are unAmerican. IDIOTS!!!!
Well, take it up with 17 states, D.C., 22 straight court decisions, etc.
AF, you don't get to deny others their civil rights.
In no way have your personal and religious liberties in any way shape or form been injured. So, politely, your are going to be told to STFU until you can show a compelling interest of your "injury" because of marriage equality: hint, there is none.
Their vote cannot legally be "thrown out" AmericanFirst
According to the Constitution, the lege is acting legitimately, and opposition such as yours is in fact rogue.
Wrong. Simply wrong.
The CA legislature according to Article II, Section 10 (c) may not alter or revoke an initiative without permission from the voters. Changing the exact wording in subservient law that reflects Prop 8's description of marriage is sedition.
Prop 8's intent, an initiative governing the description of marriage as a man and a woman, voted by the electors of that state's wide opinion of its discreet community was Upheld [Windsor 2013] as that state's electors' rights to do so. And while appeals are pending concerning state's continued rights to do so, all initiative laws reflecting Windsor's constitutional finding default to electors-rights to govern themselves with respect to gay marriage.
Voters in CA have standing to seek redress from the US Supreme Court to intervene and protect democracy.
It's remarkable how comprehensive your ignorance is, you're as clueless about 'Fascism' as the Windsor ruling.Fascists Leaders in California Sense The Future: Attempt Another Coup on Democracy
Your ignorance is appalling. The law has been gutted because it violated the Constitutional protection of personal liberties to marriage. Politely, STFU
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 2 VOTING, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, AND RECALL
SEC. 10.
(c) The Legislature may amend or repeal referendum statutes. It
may amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that
becomes effective only when approved by the electors unless the
initiative statute permits amendment or repeal without their
approval.
But the California constitution Article II, Section 10 (c) says no initiative may be "gutted" all or in part by anyone without the voters' permission. Period. There are no exceptions. Rogue officials in CA gutting family code that is subservient to Prop 8's "one man one woman" law is SEDITION.
Prop 8 in Windsor 2013 was found constitutionally to have been made validly by the discreet community of CA after a long deliberation & having weighed in with 7 million votes in support. & during these appeals, the default Highest/most recent finding on Prop 8 is Windsor 2013. Read pages 14-22 of the Opinion: United States v. Windsor
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 2 VOTING, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, AND RECALL
SEC. 10.
(c) The Legislature may amend or repeal referendum statutes. It
may amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that
becomes effective only when approved by the electors unless the
initiative statute permits amendment or repeal without their
approval.
CA officals are in violation of Law.
Any voter there could appeal to SCOTUS to restore their initiative system per CA constitution Article II Section 10 (c). http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_2
When a State Statutory laws are subordinate to State Constitutional law, which is also subordinate to United States Constitutional law. This relationship is defined by BOTH the United States Constitution and the Constitution of the State of California.
Prop 8 was ruled unconstitutional and the SCOTUS allowed that decision to remain the operative decision in the case.
Hey idiot, you stfu, I ain't stepping on anyones rights. I just pointed out that the voters of calisfornia voted and then because of a bunch of cry baby heathens their vote was thrown out. IDIOTS!!!!How about the voters rights who won the vote the American way? Oh but right, gys and the left are unAmerican. IDIOTS!!!!
Well, take it up with 17 states, D.C., 22 straight court decisions, etc.
AF, you don't get to deny others their civil rights.
In no way have your personal and religious liberties in any way shape or form been injured. So, politely, your are going to be told to STFU until you can show a compelling interest of your "injury" because of marriage equality: hint, there is none.
When a State Statutory laws are subordinate to State Constitutional law, which is also subordinate to United States Constitutional law. This relationship is defined by BOTH the United States Constitution and the Constitution of the State of California.
Prop 8 was ruled unconstitutional and the SCOTUS allowed that decision to remain the operative decision in the case.
No. Wrong again. But also "right"..I'll explain..
The appeal to overturn gay judge Walker's singular act of facism in "overturning" Prop 8 [because he wanted to marry his boyfriend] was denied on standing issues..procedural stuff. There was no constitutional finding on the Prop 8 half of the Windsor/Prop 8 Hearing. None.
However.. there was a constitutional-finding in Windsor as to a state's power to tell the fed how marriage will be defined under the question of gay marriage. That Finding was that a large swath of a given state's [because they cannot confine such a Ruling JUST to New York] discreet community weighed in "in the way the Framers of the Constitution intended" to define gay/not gay marriage for themselves. The finding of "State's choice" was upheld Windsor June 2013.
So...as you said so succinctly above..defance of SCOTUS even at the trickle-down level of law, even a subserviant family code law in CA, is still contempt of the US Supreme Court's constitutional Finding in Windsor June 2013. That is the default Law at all levels until appeals are heard.
You can cite 5...10..100 lower court rulings in the fed appeals system. No matter. If any of them defy the most current standing SCOTUS law..they aren't enforceable. They are in fact contempt if anyone tries in the interim. Default applicable law is Windsor 2013. Like you just so eloquently, if inadvertently, argued...
Any voter there could appeal to SCOTUS to restore their initiative system per CA constitution Article II Section 10 (c). http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_2
The appeal to overturn <<meaningless dribble removed>> was denied on standing issues.
Nonsense.
The states have no authority to deny citizens their civil liberties, such as denying same-sex couples access to marriage law.
