Contumacious
Radical Freedom
- Aug 16, 2009
- 19,744
- 2,474
It should be a state issue mandated by public voting
-Geaux
------------------------------------------
Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling
BY JONATHAN KAMINSKY
Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:54pm EST
n">(Reuters) - In a move viewed skeptically by legal experts, the socially conservative chief justice of Alabama's Supreme Court on Tuesday encouraged judges in his state to ignore a federal ruling last week striking down its ban on gay marriage.
![]()
Justice Roy Moore, in a letter addressed to Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, said Friday's federal ruling, which was put on hold for two weeks and could be superseded by a U.S. Supreme Court decision on gay marriage due by the end of June, violates the state constitution.
"I am dismayed by those judges in our state who have stated they will recognize and unilaterally enforce a federal court decision which does not bind them," Moore wrote. "I would advise them that the issuance of such licenses would be in defiance of the laws and constitution of Alabama."
Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling Reuters
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Supremacy Clause is the provision in Article Six, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution that establishes the United States Constitution, federal statutes, and treaties as "the supreme law of the land."
The US Constitution, not SCOTUS' pronouncements are the supreme law of the land, nevertheless homosexuals have a NINTH AMENDMENT right to marry.
.
The Supreme Court is the body that has jurisdiction over all cases that arise under the constitution. And per the founders, was the body intended to interpret the constitution.
....the courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and the legislature, in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority. The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges as, a fundamental law. It, therefore, belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents
Alexander Hamilton
Federalist Paper 78
Seems pretty clear.
....the courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and the legislature, in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority. The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges as, a fundamental law. It, therefore, belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents
Alexander Hamilton
Federalist Paper 78
Seems pretty clear.
And the federal judiciary is giving preference to constitutional guarantees over the statute.
Which is what its supposed to do.
As I stated, they are correct this time. A Corrupt judiciary , as well as a broken watch, are correct at times.
.