You are currently viewing the printable version of this article, to return to the normal page, please click here.

LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Legislating from the bench hurts republic

Story Topics
Question of the Day

Should Congress make English the official language of the U.S.?

View results

Imagine for a moment the people of California having battled for and then winning overwhelming support for homosexual marriage over the past decade. This includes successful ballot initiatives and a change to their state constitution, which ultimately resulted in their attorney general and governor not enforcing the new law and continuing a prohibition of same-sex marriages. Envision this leading to challenges in court, where ultimately a conservative circuit court judge imposed his own religious beliefs, calling the successful ballot initiative null and void.

Imagine further this stalemate leading to a lawsuit filed by a coalition of Christian, Orthodox Jew and Muslim stakeholders, where the Supreme Court's decision resulted in a conservative justice writing a majority decision sending it back to the circuit court's latest ruling, with no further appeal options. In the majority opinion, the justice explains the only reason the citizens of California, an overwhelming majority of 535 U.S. senators and congressmen and a president proposed and signed such laws in the first place, was because of their bigotry toward people of faith who believe marriage to be between one man and one woman, as their ancestors have believed for thousands of years. Imagine the outcry of voters being disenfranchised. Imagine the accusations of overreach by a majority of jurists legislating from the bench.

This hypothetical is the exact inverse of the events leading up to and result of the Supreme Court's decisions concerning homosexual marriage and the Defense of Marriage Act last week. So why the need to contemplate the tables being reversed? While there are plenty of people applauding these decisions, as well as lamenting them, it is important to realize what actually just happened to our Constitution and the Framers' construct of three co-equal branches of government in the process. Someone may be thrilled with the outcome of this particular decision, but what about an outcome dealing with property rights, the right to protect yourself or even what may lie ahead with your health care, if that decision is not in your favor?

What is important to understand and remember going into this Fourth of July week is that the federal government would never have existed if the states had not given birth to it by ratifying the U.S. Constitution. The more we resort to decisions like Obamacare or DOMA being decided by parliamentary tricks and five people in black robes, the further we remove ourselves from a constitutional republic and the liberty that comes with it.


Falls Church

© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

blog comments powered by Disqus
TWT Video Picks
You Might Also Like
  • Maureen McDonnell looks on as her husband, former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, made a statement on Tuesday after the couple was indicted on corruption charges. (associated press)

    PRUDEN: Where have the big-time grifters gone?

  • This photo taken Jan. 9, 2014,  shows New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie gesturing as he answers a question during a news conference  at the Statehouse in Trenton.  Christie will propose extending the public school calendar and lengthening the school day in a speech he hopes will help him rebound from an apparent political payback scheme orchestrated by key aides. The early front-runner for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination will make a case Tuesday Jan. 14, 2014, that children who spend more time in school graduate better prepared academically, according to excerpts of his State of the State address obtained by The Associated Press. (AP Photo/Mel Evans)

    BRUCE: Bombastic arrogance or humble determination? Chris Christie’s choice

  • ** FILE ** Secretary of State Hillary Rodham testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Jan. 23, 2013, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the deadly September attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador J. Chris Stevens and three other Americans. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)

    PRUDEN: The question to haunt the West

  • Get Breaking Alerts