We the people vs. judicial activists

In 2008 over seven million California voters passed Proposition 8 -- a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. The decision was then overturned by one person, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker. The judge's decision was appealed, and now three judges on the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled yesterday to uphold Judge Walker's decision saying that California's Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.  

One fundamental thing the pro same-sex marriage crowd has repeatedly failed to do is show where in the Constitution such a right exists to back their claim that bans on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional. They have failed because it is nowhere to be found in the Constitution.

But more than this, what does it mean when the majority of people's voices on any topic are squelched and usurped by one person in a robe? Doesn't that smack of tyranny, at least of the judicial sort? Lately there has been example after example to demonstrate that our votes don't matter. Last month a judge overturned the voters' decision in Oklahoma not to allow Sharia Law to be applied in the state's legal system - despite the fact that 78 percent of the voters approved the ballot initiative to amend their state's constitution.

Whether you are for same-sex marriage or not is neither the point nor the basis for argument. The issue - and a serious one at that - is that by throwing away people's votes, we are being denied the right to have our votes count and denied the right to amend our own state constitutions by activist judges who have very clear political agendas, but very murky adherence to right and wrong. Votes matter. But it only takes one activist judge's opinion to stomp out everyone else's. This needs to turn around lest we become a republic in name only.

Have a comment?  Click on the comments link in the bar below - no registration necessary.