Let the States Decide- ALA Supreme Court Justice urges Defiance- Gay Marraige

[Geaux4it]

It should be a state issue mandated by public voting

-Geaux
------------------------------------------

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling
BY JONATHAN KAMINSKY

Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:54pm EST


n">(Reuters) - In a move viewed skeptically by legal experts, the socially conservative chief justice of Alabama's Supreme Court on Tuesday encouraged judges in his state to ignore a federal ruling last week striking down its ban on gay marriage.

Justice Roy Moore, in a letter addressed to Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, said Friday's federal ruling, which was put on hold for two weeks and could be superseded by a U.S. Supreme Court decision on gay marriage due by the end of June, violates the state constitution.

"I am dismayed by those judges in our state who have stated they will recognize and unilaterally enforce a federal court decision which does not bind them," Moore wrote. "I would advise them that the issuance of such licenses would be in defiance of the laws and constitution of Alabama."

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling Reuters

I agree. Let the States decide what they want done in their State and whats considered legal.

So if a state decided that say....guns were illegal, you wouldnt have a problem with that?

Comparing mental disorder to a gun is demented dude

-Geaux

 

[Skylar]

It should be a state issue mandated by public voting

-Geaux
------------------------------------------

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling
BY JONATHAN KAMINSKY

Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:54pm EST


n">(Reuters) - In a move viewed skeptically by legal experts, the socially conservative chief justice of Alabama's Supreme Court on Tuesday encouraged judges in his state to ignore a federal ruling last week striking down its ban on gay marriage.

Justice Roy Moore, in a letter addressed to Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, said Friday's federal ruling, which was put on hold for two weeks and could be superseded by a U.S. Supreme Court decision on gay marriage due by the end of June, violates the state constitution.

"I am dismayed by those judges in our state who have stated they will recognize and unilaterally enforce a federal court decision which does not bind them," Moore wrote. "I would advise them that the issuance of such licenses would be in defiance of the laws and constitution of Alabama."

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling Reuters

I agree. Let the States decide what they want done in their State and whats considered legal.

So if a state decided that say....guns were illegal, you wouldnt have a problem with that?

Comparing mental disorder to a gun is demented dude

-Geaux

Its the same federal court intervention and overturning of State laws. And you said let the States decide.

 

[Geaux4it]

It should be a state issue mandated by public voting

-Geaux
------------------------------------------

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling
BY JONATHAN KAMINSKY

Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:54pm EST


n">(Reuters) - In a move viewed skeptically by legal experts, the socially conservative chief justice of Alabama's Supreme Court on Tuesday encouraged judges in his state to ignore a federal ruling last week striking down its ban on gay marriage.

Justice Roy Moore, in a letter addressed to Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, said Friday's federal ruling, which was put on hold for two weeks and could be superseded by a U.S. Supreme Court decision on gay marriage due by the end of June, violates the state constitution.

"I am dismayed by those judges in our state who have stated they will recognize and unilaterally enforce a federal court decision which does not bind them," Moore wrote. "I would advise them that the issuance of such licenses would be in defiance of the laws and constitution of Alabama."

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling Reuters

I agree. Let the States decide what they want done in their State and whats considered legal.

So if a state decided that say....guns were illegal, you wouldnt have a problem with that?

The people/state decided. You left that out.

Let me know when the people vote out guns there genius

-Geaux

 

[Skylar]

It should be a state issue mandated by public voting

-Geaux
------------------------------------------

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling
BY JONATHAN KAMINSKY

Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:54pm EST


n">(Reuters) - In a move viewed skeptically by legal experts, the socially conservative chief justice of Alabama's Supreme Court on Tuesday encouraged judges in his state to ignore a federal ruling last week striking down its ban on gay marriage.

Justice Roy Moore, in a letter addressed to Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, said Friday's federal ruling, which was put on hold for two weeks and could be superseded by a U.S. Supreme Court decision on gay marriage due by the end of June, violates the state constitution.

"I am dismayed by those judges in our state who have stated they will recognize and unilaterally enforce a federal court decision which does not bind them," Moore wrote. "I would advise them that the issuance of such licenses would be in defiance of the laws and constitution of Alabama."

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling Reuters

I agree. Let the States decide what they want done in their State and whats considered legal.

So if a state decided that say....guns were illegal, you wouldnt have a problem with that?

The people/state decided. You left that out.

Let me know when the people vote out guns there genius

-Geaux

The guns were removed via the vote of the reps of the people using State authority. You said let the State decide. And yet the USSC stepped in and overturned State authority and imposed their own ruling based on constitutional guarantees.

Why wasn't that an overreach if you're using your 'let the State decide' logic?

 

[Geaux4it]

70 Percent of Alabama Voters Still Against Same-Sex Marriage
Posted: Jan 27, 2015 4:33 PM PSTUpdated: Jan 28, 2015 6:39 AM PST
By Tiffany McCall
CONNECT


MOBILE, Ala. -An exclusive News 5 statewide poll in partnership with Strategy Research shows that Alabama voters have not changed their views on gay marriage to any great degree in the past decade. Our telephone poll of 3,116 registered voters shows that seven out of 10 polled still oppose allowing gay marriage despite recent court rulings here in Alabama and across the nation.

In 2006, an amendment to the Alabama constitution was passed with the support of 81 percent of voters. So, the poll indicates that in ten years, support for allowing gays to marry has only changed 10 percent. The News 5 poll was conducted across the entire state today and has an accuracy rate of plus or minus two percent.

The results breakdown like this: A total of 3,114 registered voters participated: those opposed totaled 2,177 (70%) and 937 (30%) said they support gay marriage in our
state.

Oppose Gay Marriage in Alabama --- 2,177 - 70%

Support Gay Marriage in Alabama --- 937 - 30%



70 Percent of Alabama Voters Still Against Same-Sex Marriage

 

[Geaux4it]

It should be a state issue mandated by public voting

-Geaux
------------------------------------------

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling
BY JONATHAN KAMINSKY

Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:54pm EST


n">(Reuters) - In a move viewed skeptically by legal experts, the socially conservative chief justice of Alabama's Supreme Court on Tuesday encouraged judges in his state to ignore a federal ruling last week striking down its ban on gay marriage.

Justice Roy Moore, in a letter addressed to Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, said Friday's federal ruling, which was put on hold for two weeks and could be superseded by a U.S. Supreme Court decision on gay marriage due by the end of June, violates the state constitution.

"I am dismayed by those judges in our state who have stated they will recognize and unilaterally enforce a federal court decision which does not bind them," Moore wrote. "I would advise them that the issuance of such licenses would be in defiance of the laws and constitution of Alabama."

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling Reuters

I agree. Let the States decide what they want done in their State and whats considered legal.

So if a state decided that say....guns were illegal, you wouldnt have a problem with that?

The people/state decided. You left that out.

Let me know when the people vote out guns there genius

-Geaux

The guns were removed via the vote of the reps of the people using State authority. You said let the State decide. And yet the USSC stepped in and overturned State authority and imposed their own ruling based on constitutional guarantees.

Why wasn't that an overreach if you're using your 'let the State decide' logic?

Let me slow down.... The people/vote is backed by the state. Hence, the overarching authority is indeed the state

-Geaux

 

[JakeStarkey]

The folks of Alabama were wrong about woemn and the vote as well as civil rights and blacks.

Their education system and home down religion contribute to their primitivism.

 

[Geaux4it]

The folks of Alabama were wrong about woemn and the vote as well as civil rights and blacks.

Their education system and home down religion contribute to their primitivism.

Some might call that a racist point of view. Alabama today is nothing like Alabama from the period you described

-Geaux

 

[Skylar]

70 Percent of Alabama Voters Still Against Same-Sex Marriage
Posted: Jan 27, 2015 4:33 PM PSTUpdated: Jan 28, 2015 6:39 AM PST
By Tiffany McCall
CONNECT


MOBILE, Ala. -An exclusive News 5 statewide poll in partnership with Strategy Research shows that Alabama voters have not changed their views on gay marriage to any great degree in the past decade. Our telephone poll of 3,116 registered voters shows that seven out of 10 polled still oppose allowing gay marriage despite recent court rulings here in Alabama and across the nation.

In 2006, an amendment to the Alabama constitution was passed with the support of 81 percent of voters. So, the poll indicates that in ten years, support for allowing gays to marry has only changed 10 percent. The News 5 poll was conducted across the entire state today and has an accuracy rate of plus or minus two percent.

The results breakdown like this: A total of 3,114 registered voters participated: those opposed totaled 2,177 (70%) and 937 (30%) said they support gay marriage in our
state.

Oppose Gay Marriage in Alabama --- 2,177 - 70%

Support Gay Marriage in Alabama --- 937 - 30%



70 Percent of Alabama Voters Still Against Same-Sex Marriage

And? Are rights up for a vote? If so, can we vote away gun rights with a simple majority? Or do constitutional guarantees trump state powers?

You can't have it both ways.....either the federal government has the authority to overturn state law to protect constitutional guarantees, or they don't. Pick which.

 

[thereisnospoon]

It should be a state issue mandated by public voting

-Geaux
------------------------------------------

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling
BY JONATHAN KAMINSKY

Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:54pm EST


n">(Reuters) - In a move viewed skeptically by legal experts, the socially conservative chief justice of Alabama's Supreme Court on Tuesday encouraged judges in his state to ignore a federal ruling last week striking down its ban on gay marriage.

Justice Roy Moore, in a letter addressed to Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, said Friday's federal ruling, which was put on hold for two weeks and could be superseded by a U.S. Supreme Court decision on gay marriage due by the end of June, violates the state constitution.

"I am dismayed by those judges in our state who have stated they will recognize and unilaterally enforce a federal court decision which does not bind them," Moore wrote. "I would advise them that the issuance of such licenses would be in defiance of the laws and constitution of Alabama."

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling Reuters

Umm......Ok..

 

[Skylar]

It should be a state issue mandated by public voting

-Geaux
------------------------------------------

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling
BY JONATHAN KAMINSKY

Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:54pm EST


n">(Reuters) - In a move viewed skeptically by legal experts, the socially conservative chief justice of Alabama's Supreme Court on Tuesday encouraged judges in his state to ignore a federal ruling last week striking down its ban on gay marriage.

Justice Roy Moore, in a letter addressed to Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, said Friday's federal ruling, which was put on hold for two weeks and could be superseded by a U.S. Supreme Court decision on gay marriage due by the end of June, violates the state constitution.

"I am dismayed by those judges in our state who have stated they will recognize and unilaterally enforce a federal court decision which does not bind them," Moore wrote. "I would advise them that the issuance of such licenses would be in defiance of the laws and constitution of Alabama."

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling Reuters

I agree. Let the States decide what they want done in their State and whats considered legal.

So if a state decided that say....guns were illegal, you wouldnt have a problem with that?

The people/state decided. You left that out.

Let me know when the people vote out guns there genius

-Geaux

The guns were removed via the vote of the reps of the people using State authority. You said let the State decide. And yet the USSC stepped in and overturned State authority and imposed their own ruling based on constitutional guarantees.

Why wasn't that an overreach if you're using your 'let the State decide' logic?

Let me slow down.... The people/vote is backed by the state. Hence, the overarching authority is indeed the state

-Geaux

And let me slow it down for you......are rights up for a vote? If so, can we vote away your gun rights with a simple majority? What other rights can we vote away from you by the same margins?

Or......does the USSC protect your rights from violation by State laws?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Ah! Enlightened, progressive Alabama! They told us that slavery and the subsequent Jim Crow laws were matters of "state's rights".

So these southern knuckledraggers have no problem with repression. It's their "right" as a state to be idiots.

"Segregation now, segregation tomorrow!" Said Fascist-in-Chief George Wallace. Today's Alabamian is not that different.

Imagine being so convinced that hatred is the right thing to do that you would wrap yourself in e time worn State's Rights argument.

I must say. This guy is attempting to appear....Different.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Ah! Enlightened, progressive Alabama! They told us that slavery and the subsequent Jim Crow laws were matters of "state's rights".

So these southern knuckledraggers have no problem with repression. It's their "right" as a state to be idiots.

"Segregation now, segregation tomorrow!" Said Fascist-in-Chief George Wallace. Today's Alabamian is not that different.

Imagine being so convinced that hatred is the right thing to do that you would wrap yourself in e time worn State's Rights argument.

Do you ever tire of being stupid?
Wallace was a progressive, btw.
Anyway, Judge Moore is correct. States should nullify the federal law, just as COlorado did.

Well. If ya want to look at it from that perspective, yeah, I can see that point.

 

[thereisnospoon]

It should be a state issue mandated by public voting

-Geaux
------------------------------------------

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling
BY JONATHAN KAMINSKY

Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:54pm EST


n">(Reuters) - In a move viewed skeptically by legal experts, the socially conservative chief justice of Alabama's Supreme Court on Tuesday encouraged judges in his state to ignore a federal ruling last week striking down its ban on gay marriage.

Justice Roy Moore, in a letter addressed to Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, said Friday's federal ruling, which was put on hold for two weeks and could be superseded by a U.S. Supreme Court decision on gay marriage due by the end of June, violates the state constitution.

"I am dismayed by those judges in our state who have stated they will recognize and unilaterally enforce a federal court decision which does not bind them," Moore wrote. "I would advise them that the issuance of such licenses would be in defiance of the laws and constitution of Alabama."

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling Reuters

Because that worked so well for them on both interracial marriage and segregation.

Let's not get hysterical. This is the opinion of ONE person

 

[thereisnospoon]

Ah! Enlightened, progressive Alabama! They told us that slavery and the subsequent Jim Crow laws were matters of "state's rights".

So these southern knuckledraggers have no problem with repression. It's their "right" as a state to be idiots.

"Segregation now, segregation tomorrow!" Said Fascist-in-Chief George Wallace. Today's Alabamian is not that different.

Imagine being so convinced that hatred is the right thing to do that you would wrap yourself in e time worn State's Rights argument.

Do you ever tire of being stupid?
Wallace was a progressive, btw.
Anyway, Judge Moore is correct. States should nullify the federal law, just as COlorado did.

The issue isn't federal law. The issue is federal court rulings. There's no supreme court ruling that says states must outlaw marijuana. So Colorado didn't nullify any such ruling.

Just a minute. Federal law deems marijuana an illegal controlled substance. If one interprets the Constitution in the proper manner, the Supremacy Clause takes precedent. Colorado's as well as the other states legalization of marijuana is in violation of federal law. The administration ( DOJ) simply has not gotten around to enforcing it

 

[thereisnospoon]

Ah! Enlightened, progressive Alabama! They told us that slavery and the subsequent Jim Crow laws were matters of "state's rights".

So these southern knuckledraggers have no problem with repression. It's their "right" as a state to be idiots.

"Segregation now, segregation tomorrow!" Said Fascist-in-Chief George Wallace. Today's Alabamian is not that different.

Imagine being so convinced that hatred is the right thing to do that you would wrap yourself in e time worn State's Rights argument.

Do you ever tire of being stupid?
Wallace was a progressive, btw.
Anyway, Judge Moore is correct. States should nullify the federal law, just as COlorado did.

Moron.

George Wallace was a racist Conservative of the first order.

Just because he was evil incarnate, you want to label him Progressive because it validates your myopic view of political ideology.

No he wasn't....No way. You label Wallace a conservative because he's white and he's a racist. To you that is the essence of conservatism.

 

[Skylar]

It should be a state issue mandated by public voting

-Geaux
------------------------------------------

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling
BY JONATHAN KAMINSKY

Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:54pm EST


n">(Reuters) - In a move viewed skeptically by legal experts, the socially conservative chief justice of Alabama's Supreme Court on Tuesday encouraged judges in his state to ignore a federal ruling last week striking down its ban on gay marriage.

Justice Roy Moore, in a letter addressed to Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, said Friday's federal ruling, which was put on hold for two weeks and could be superseded by a U.S. Supreme Court decision on gay marriage due by the end of June, violates the state constitution.

"I am dismayed by those judges in our state who have stated they will recognize and unilaterally enforce a federal court decision which does not bind them," Moore wrote. "I would advise them that the issuance of such licenses would be in defiance of the laws and constitution of Alabama."

Alabama Supreme Court chief justice encourages defiance on gay marriage ruling Reuters

Because that worked so well for them on both interracial marriage and segregation.

Let's not get hysterical. This is the opinion of ONE person

This isn't a barista at a Greenboro starbucks.

This is the chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. A man who has already demonstrated he'll gladly defy a federal court order.

And you interpret that *one* sentence as 'hysterical'? My goodness, you're rather melodramatic, aren't you?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Conservatives have always tried to put the rights of Americans up for a "popular" vote and have been told continually that it flies in the face of the constitution and yet they still try to do it. Also, Alabama, my birth state, is an eternal embarrassment to democracy and human decency.

So..ONE GUY with an ax to grind because he is too busy with his face buried in a Bible has an extreme viewpoint and you impugn the entire state?
Can I ask you a favor...I have a fairly large pain job to finish...May borrow one of your broad brushes?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Ah! Enlightened, progressive Alabama! They told us that slavery and the subsequent Jim Crow laws were matters of "state's rights".

So these southern knuckledraggers have no problem with repression. It's their "right" as a state to be idiots.

"Segregation now, segregation tomorrow!" Said Fascist-in-Chief George Wallace. Today's Alabamian is not that different.

Imagine being so convinced that hatred is the right thing to do that you would wrap yourself in e time worn State's Rights argument.

Do you ever tire of being stupid?
Wallace was a progressive, btw.
Anyway, Judge Moore is correct. States should nullify the federal law, just as COlorado did.

Moron.

George Wallace was a racist Conservative of the first order.

Just because he was evil incarnate, you want to label him Progressive because it validates your myopic view of political ideology.

George Wallace was a shameless panderer. When it got him votes he was a segregationist, later when it got him votes he was surprisingly progressive in his race relations. He won his last term in office with a large majority of the black vote because he simply wanted to be governor and would do whatever it took to get those votes even if it meant a total reversal of policy.

Yet you label him a conservative.
Because it is convenient?

 

[Skylar]

Ah! Enlightened, progressive Alabama! They told us that slavery and the subsequent Jim Crow laws were matters of "state's rights".

So these southern knuckledraggers have no problem with repression. It's their "right" as a state to be idiots.

"Segregation now, segregation tomorrow!" Said Fascist-in-Chief George Wallace. Today's Alabamian is not that different.

Imagine being so convinced that hatred is the right thing to do that you would wrap yourself in e time worn State's Rights argument.

Do you ever tire of being stupid?
Wallace was a progressive, btw.
Anyway, Judge Moore is correct. States should nullify the federal law, just as COlorado did.

The issue isn't federal law. The issue is federal court rulings. There's no supreme court ruling that says states must outlaw marijuana. So Colorado didn't nullify any such ruling.

Just a minute. Federal law deems marijuana an illegal controlled substance. If one interprets the Constitution in the proper manner, the Supremacy Clause takes precedent. Colorado's as well as the other states legalization of marijuana is in violation of federal law. The administration ( DOJ) simply has not gotten around to enforcing it

In the proper manner....according to who? Surely not the Supreme Court.

The court has found that the State legalizing a substance doesn't mean that a Federal Law is invalid or unenforceable in that State. But instead that Federal law enforcement can still be applied within the State. That's just plain old concurrent jurisdiction.

The USSC has never ruled that Colorado couldn't legalize pot. Only that their legalization had no bearing on Federal law enforcement.

While you may have a different opinion, its essentially irrelevant to any discussion of any likely outcome of actual cases. As your opinion doesn't form any kind of binding precedent.