February 19, 2004

Gay Marriage Practicalities II

Stanley Kurtz has a sad commentary on the legal somersaults that gay marriage advocates are going through to get their policy preferences installed by hook or by crook. The judge refused to issue an injunction because of an incredibly small issue, the use of a semicolon. If the word or had been substituted, he would have permitted it, supposedly, but the judge did not permit the request to be rewritten and refiled even though it is patently obvious that the mayor's actions are illegal.

Kurtz' point is that judges are starting to not even bother to pretend that they are anything but political actors in their pet social reform causes. For people on the other side, this makes the act of going by the rules and peacefully submitting to the rule of law a bitter joke. Unfortunately, it's going to do tremendous damage to the system because you can't continually frustrate a majority. Eventually there will be an amendment that will neuter the judges and it will likely be ugly because the judges are smart and will work around anything less than a mandatory legislative procedure to impeach at the slightest provocation.

If privileges and immunities can be neutered, let's not kid ourselves here, a marriage amendment can be too. The key is judges acting as legislators.

Posted by TMLutas at February 19, 2004 07:40 PM