Kudos to Judge Walker

[hork]

We knew it would happen, let's just hope the appeals process bears out the supremacy of the Constitution, and the ideals of liberty and equality over fear, dogma, and intolerance all the way up the ladder.

Kudos to you Judge Walker for placing American ideals over political rhetoric, fear, and hate mongering......

[P562045]

And now for the rest of the story that a person would not see on the Evening News.

So should I thank Judge Walker for nullifying a direct vote of voters in California. This law came from the voters and not from the representatives in Sacramento. A proposition in California which prop 8 was voted by the people that voted in California.

Another aspect of this story is Federal law should only be the supreme law of the land when it is most convenient. I have yet to hear of a court case where the Defense of Marriage Act has been ruled unconstitutional.

And last but not least. The cost of doing business. Now businesses have long denied same sex couple various benefits just on the basis that they are a same sex couple. I want to make sure these extra costs to businesses for the first time giving benefits to same sex couples are not just passed on to consumers by raising the prices of a product or service.

Finally I do remember our discussion on the merits of Justice Sotomayor becoming a justice. I discussed a portion of the 14th amendment that basically says that everyone must be treated equally.

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

It would seem to me that everyone in California has an equal right to vote as they see fit and then all of sudden a federal judge can say that the direct vote by the voters in California no longer counts.

[hork]

that's the same logic that southern states used to validate jim crow. and just like then, it's a seriously flawed an anti-american logic.

to champion, support, or condone any legislation that relegates a section of the population that is not doing anything that a) harms anyone, or b) is anyone's business in the first place amounts to the creation and advocation of a second class citizenry.

since you're espousing the tenants of government and constitutional law, how would you begin to justify that referencing those two topics?

[P562045]

Where exactly did Jim Crow laws come from. It is none other than state and local governments. So these various governments must of thought it was o.k. to make these kinds of laws.

So where did Jim Crow laws finally become reversed it was none other than countless courts of law.

So I guess it takes a court to reverse the decisions of state and local governments. Well I guess I should thank Judge Walker for upholding the 14th amendment in this particular case.

But in this situation is a bit different. The voters in California voted for prop 8. Reversing the decision of voters should not be taken lightly no matter what the voters in any state said they wanted. Many of these types of situations such as prop 8 would have never happened if it did not take a simple majority to change the California Constitution. In this particular case just under 53 percent of the voters in California voted for prop 8.

I could be wrong about this but it appears to me that it only takes a majority of voters to vote for something and this decision can change the California constitution. That is exactly what happened in this case. There are obstacles to getting something on the ballot such as needing a certain amount of signatures. I wonder if there are fees to get something on a ballot as well and I don't know the answer.

But of course I am supposed to just thank Judge Walker for his decision and any judge can reverse any decision of voters of any state. I guess that is really what is bothering me when it comes to Judge Walker's decision. Well if any judge can reverse any decision of voters where does something like I just mentioned end? This is a rhetorical question. But if as I just mentioned if one judge can reverse the decision of a voter of any state then another judge says I can do that as well and it never ends.

So sorry for bringing up a part of our history that is not so pleasant but it is very important to talk about it if we really want to or not. Courts as I said are the main way that the past decisions of state and local governments can be reversed.