Finally, the medical and dental priorities have been
satisfied and we are about to aim our Acura North on I 75, step on the gas and
leave 90 degree heat and humidity behind.
Polly, God bless her, has done a yeoman job of packing. I
usually make the trip to Michigan with a simple overnight bag filled with sox and
underwear. She fastidiously assembles her wardrobe to be prepared for all kinds
of weather and every level of social propriety.
There are still a few odds and ends to be attended to, but
right now I have a couple of minutes to fill, and I have decided to make one more
pass at commenting on the gay marriage cases.
My first efforts didn’t pass my domestic editorial board.
I hope you’ll understand. As a lawyer, a judge, a legal
educator and sometime student of the United States Constitution, I read the
majority opinion in the Obergefell gay marriage case with disappointment
bordering on disgust.
The Court didn’t even pretend to be rendering an opinion
explaining its decision in the cases on its docket. Quite the contrary, the Court openly told us
that it was creating a new right, which it declared to be binding on all 308
million people in the United States.
The Congress of the United States needs to garner a two
thirds vote in both Houses just to propose a constitutional amendment. The
Court has claimed the power to actually adopt an amendment by a 5 to 4 vote.
Candidly, the decision made me mad. Of course, it didn’t
really surprise me. The Court only hears cases it wants to hear. When they took
the gay marriage cases, it was pretty clear that they wanted to decide as they
did.
In my calmer moments, I sigh and say, ‘Appellate Courts make
lots of mistakes. Look at the Dred Scott case, where they said black people
couldn’t be citizens. Look at the Plessy case where they said the States could
have segregation laws. Those decisions didn’t stand. Eventually, they were
overruled.
Appellate courts are always searching for the truth, always
correcting the mistakes of the past. Perhaps some day, some future Supreme
Court will overrule Roe v Wade and the Obergefell case. Some day the Supreme
Court may realize that it is only a court and not a super legislature and get
out of the business of running prisons and school boards and imposing new
taxes. Some day. But probably not soon.
The difficulty with a run away Supreme Court is that every
decision makes somebody happy. And if enough people, enough of the ‘right’
people, are happy with a decision, it is celebrated as a landmark improvement
in the lives and liberties of the American people.
The really sad part is that Supreme Court Justices live in a
different place. Not only do they have little or no contact with commoners,
their social and professional lives are cocooned by clerks, lawyers, academics
and sycophants whose every word and gesture reinforces the notion that they are
the most powerful leaders of the civilized world.
It has been well said that power corrupts and absolute power
corrupts absolutely.
Unfortunately, in the public square, it is difficult to
depersonalize issues of law and governance. The folks in line at the supermarket
who are appalled by the Court’s decision have no interest in fixing the Supreme
Court so that it will be more obedient to the Constitution. They might gladly
hang Anthony Kennedy in effigy, or impeach Justices Kagen and Ginsburg who had performed gay marriages
before they heard the case, but if you talk about changing the way we choose
Supreme Court Justices, they glaze over.
Perhaps Thomas Jefferson was right. Maybe the only way the
people can deal with a run away Supreme Court is by nullification and
interposition. Call it protest, civil disobedience, whatever. Maybe some
caterers will have to go to jail for refusing to service gay weddings. Maybe
some county clerks will get fired for refusing to issue licenses, but just
maybe that’s the only way the people can take back the right to make their own
laws in a republican form of government.
Or, we could all just shrug our shoulders and sigh, “You
can’t fight City Hall. Why bother to try?”
Once again Judge, you are spot on. My liberal friends celebrate the Court's decision without for one moment recognizing the freedom they lost when the Court elected to ignore the Constitution and legislate from the bench. They are clueless as to the dangerous precedent set by this Court's return to the reckless concept of substantive due process. Kennedy and Blackmun and their majorities, lawless judges who somehow made it to the highest Court in the land. We need an Article V convention to correct these errors.
ReplyDelete