Home » Blogs »

August 5, 2010 Print

Surprise! Judge Walker finds Prop. 8 unconstitutional

by Jenny Tyree

Heads are still spinning not at the decision, but at the irrational conclusions of Judge Walker in his decision that Prop. 8 is unconstitutional.  Read about it here.

Proposition 8 was California’s ballot initiative which a majority of voters defined marriage constitutionally as the union of a man and a woman.

In spite of their voice, Judge Walker declares that the federal Constitution requires same-sex marriage, and suggests that those who see the issue differently—who believe that marriage is vital to giving children both a mother and a father–do not deserve to have a viewpoint.  He singles out people of faith—as if documents like the Bible are the only place to get the idea that there are two halves of humanity—male and female, and that children result from heterosexual union.

But marriage wouldn’t have been defended at the ballot box 31 times if it wasn’t supported also by people who do not claim a religious faith.

Maggie Gallagher summed things up well in this San Francisco Chronicle article,

Those in power will call it tolerance, they will call it pluralism, but in truth same-sex marriage is a government takeover of an institution the government did not make, cannot in justice redefine, and ought to respect and protect as essential to the common good.

An appeal of the decision is expected, and would go to the Supreme Court if Judge Walker’s decision is affirmed by the 9th Circuit.



Print



  • Ex-GOP Voter

    You folks can’t have it both ways. Either both this decision and Citizen’s United are judicial activism or they aren’t. In both cases, judges went against established precedent/legislation. Focus already told me that Citizen’s United wasn’t activist ruling – so this really can’t be either (at least logically).

    • Jenny Tyree

      Ex-GOP Voter,

      The legislation in Citizen’s United was trumped by the First Amendment – that’s not activism. In the case of Prop 8, the 14th Amendment argument is just plain wrong and invented – there’s no basis in the 14th for it. That’s why Perry is an activist decision but CU is legitimate. That may not sit well with liberals, but that’s how the dictionary definition of judicial activism works.

      Thanks for writing,

      Jenny

  • http://joanlundgren@clearwire.net Joan

    I find Judge walker’s ruling irrational. There are huge differences between same sex and opposite sex unions that are of concern to the state and nation – namely the birth and rearing of children. Joan Lundgren

NOTE: Referral to websites not produced by CitizenLink is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.