9th Circuit Assumes Legislative Power In Same Sex Marriage Case

[johnwk]

SEE: 9th Circuit strikes down same-sex marriage bans in Nevada and Idaho

October 7 at 4:32 PM

”The 9th Circuit Court ruled Tuesday that bans on marriage for same-sex couples in Idaho and Nevada were unconstitutional.

The ruling stated that the defendants’ argument that bans on marriage for same-sex couples promotes “the welfare of children, by encouraging good parenting in stable opposite sex families,” had no evidence of to support it.

Because defendants have failed to demonstrate that these laws further any legitimate purpose, they unjustifiably discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, and are in violation of the Equal Protection Clause,” the ruling states.”

So, once again the court fails to demonstrate the 14th Amendment was adopted to forbid the various State Governments from making distinctions based upon sex when issuing a state marriage license, and the court goes on to assume legislative power by second guessing the wisdom of legislation which is not the court’s function! In ELDRED et al. v. ASHCROFT, ATTORNEY GENERAL (2003) the Supreme Court notes: …..we are not at liberty to second-guess congressional determinations and policy judgments of this order, however debatable or arguably unwise they may be…The wisdom of Congress' action, however, is not within our province to second guess.

In fact, the 14th Amendment was intentionally adopted to forbid states from making distinctions based upon race, color or former condition of slavery, a very narrow area. It was never intended to forbid the various State Governments from making distinctions in law based upon sex, and especially not intended to do so with regard to issuing a state marriage license!

The very meaning and intentions for which the 14th Amendment was adopted is summarized as follows:

“Its whole effect is not to confer or regulate rights, but to require that whatever of these enumerated rights and obligations are imposed by State laws shall be for and upon all citizens alike without distinctions based on race or former condition of slavery…It permits the States to say that the wife may not testify, sue or contract. It makes no law as to this. Its whole effect is to require that whatever rights as to each of the enumerated civil (not political) matters the States may confer upon one race or color of the citizens shall be held by all races in equality…It does not prohibit you from discriminating between citizens of the same race, or of different races, as to what their rights to testify, to inherit &c. shall be. But if you do discriminate, it must not be on account of race, color or former conditions of slavery. That is all. If you permit a white man who is an infidel to testify, so you must a colored infidel. Self-evidently this is the whole effect of this first section. It secures-not to all citizens, but to all races as races who are citizens- equality of protection in those enumerated civil rights which the States may deem proper to confer upon any race.” ___ SEE: Rep. Shellabarger, Cong. Globe, 1866, page 1293

There is a much bigger picture involved with these homosexual “marriage” cases and it involves a despotic assumption of power not granted to the court! What is at stake is allowing our judicial branch of government to assume and exercise legislative power and then impose its personal whims and fancies upon the people of the United States without their consent being obtained under our Constitution’s amendment process.

The justice in this case ought to be remove from the bench and severely punished for judicial tyranny– no punishment left off the table!

Why do so many feel it is ok when our judges and Justices take it upon themselves to impose their will upon the people of the United States and ignore the documented intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was adopted? Why is there little support in defending the rule of law written into our Constitution and so many who embrace judicial tyranny which our judicial system seems to find more comfortable engaging in as each day passes? Were we not warned about submitting to tyranny and despotism?

”Submit to despotism for an hour and you concede the principle. John Adams said, in 1775, “Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud.” It is the only thing a people determined to be free can do. Republics have often failed, and have been succeeded by the most revolting despotisms; and always it was the voice of timidity, cowardice, or false leaders counseling submission, that led to the final downfall of freedom. It was the cowardice and treachery of the Senate of Rome that allowed the usurper to gain power, inch by inch, to overthrow the Republic. The history of the downfall of Republics is the same in all ages. The first inch that is yielded to despotism - the first blow, dealt at the Constitution, that is not resisted - is the beginning of the end of the nation’s ruin.”__THE OLD GUARD, A MONTHLY JOURNAL DEVOTED TO THE PRINCIPLES OF 1776 AND 1787

JWK



The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. ___ Madison, Federalist Paper No. 47

 

[bodecea]

What is the statute number of the new law the court created?

 

[Skylar]

So, once again the court fails to demonstrate the 14th Amendment was adopted to forbid the various State Governments from making distinctions based upon sex when issuing a state marriage license, and the court goes on to assume legislative power by second guessing the wisdom of legislation which is not the court’s function!

It doesn't sound like you've read the 14th amendment. Try it. I think it will help clear up a lot of your misconceptions on what the 14th was adopted to do. Pay special attention to the last half of section 1.

 

[Rotagilla]

What is the statute number of the new law the court created?

That's the whole point..leftists find activist circuit/appeals court judges who'll rule in their favor on an issue and bypass the constitution.
Now we have a supreme court who are the real "legislators" in america...and just like all the politicians they've been compromised by NSA and they know that if they don't all march in step the world will learn their secrets.
That's why you see so many "about faces" by politicians and judges once they get the "message"

So we have a politicized group of activist judges bypassing the constitution and "making" de facto laws by choosing or refusing to hear certain cases.

Originally having 3 independent branches of government with a checks and balances system ensured that no one branch would accrue too much power....unfortunately our founding fathers couldn't foresee the day when ALL THREE branches of gvmt became corrupt and enabling to each other...At this point the system is corrupt beyond redemption and only a re set will correct it.....and that's coming....

 

[Rotagilla]

So, once again the court fails to demonstrate the 14th Amendment was adopted to forbid the various State Governments from making distinctions based upon sex when issuing a state marriage license, and the court goes on to assume legislative power by second guessing the wisdom of legislation which is not the court’s function!

It doesn't sound like you've read the 14th amendment. Try it. I think it will help clear up a lot of your misconceptions on what the 14th was adopted to do. Pay special attention to the last half of section 1.

14th amendment wasn't presented or ratified legally... it was railroaded through for political reasons.



THE 14TH AMENDMENT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
- Judge L.H. Perez



1. The Joint Resolution proposing said Amendment was not submitted to or adopted by a Constitutional Congress. Article I, Section 3, and Article V of the U.S. Constitution.

2. The Joint Resolution was not submitted to the President for his approval. Article I, Section 7.

3. The proposed 14th Amendment was rejected by more than one-fourth of all the States then in the Union, and it was never ratified by three-fourths of all the States in the Union.

I. The Unconstitutional Congress

The United States Constitution provides:

Article 1, Section 3. "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State ***"

Article V provides: "No State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate."

The fact that twenty-three (23) Senators had been unlawfully excluded from the U.S. Senate, in order to secure a two-thirds vote for adoption of the Joint Resolution proposing the 14th Amendment is shown by Resolutions of protest adopted by the following state legislatures:

The New Jersey Legislature by Resolution of March 27, 1868, protested as follows:

The said proposed amendment not having yet received the assent of the three-fourths of the states, which is necessary to make it valid, the natural and constitutional right of this state to withdraw its assent is undeniable ***.

That it being necessary by the constitution that every amendment to the same should be proposed by two-thirds of both houses of congress, the authors of said proposition, for the purpose of securing the assent of the requisite majority, determined to, and did, exclude from the said two houses eighty representatives from eleven states of the Union, upon the pretense that there were no such states in the Union; but, finding that two-thirds of the remainder of the said houses could not be brought to assent to the said proposition, they deliberately formed and carried out the design of mutilating the integrity of the United States Senate, and without any pretext or justification, other than the possession of the power, without the right, and in palpable violation of the Constitution, ejected a member of their own body, representing this state, and thus practically denied to New Jersey its equal suffrage in the Senate, and thereby nominally secured the vote of two-thirds of the said houses. (New Jersey Acts, March 27, 1868)

The Alabama Legislature protested against being deprived of representation in the Senate of the U.S. Congress. (Alabama House Journal, 1866, pp. 210-213)

The Texas Legislature by Resolution on October 15, 1866, protested as follows:

The amendment to the Constitution proposed by this joint resolution as Article XIV is presented to the Legislature of Texas for its action thereon, under Article V of that Constitution. This Article V, providing the mode of making amendments to that instrument, contemplates the participation by all the States through their representatives in Congress, in proposing amendments. As representatives in Congress from nearly one-third of the States were excluded from the Congress proposing the amendments, the constitutional requirement was not complied with; it was violated in letter and in spirit; and the proposing of these amendments to States which were excluded from all participation in their initiation in Congress, is a nullity. (Texas House Journal, 1866, p. 577.)

The Arkansas Legislature, by Resolution on December 17, 1866, protested as follows:

The Constitution authorized two-thirds of both houses of Congress to propose amendments; and, as eleven States were excluded from deliberation and decision upon the one now submitted, the conclusion is inevitable that it is not proposed by legal authority, but in palpable violation of the Constitution. (Arkansas House Journal, 1866, p. 287.)

The Georgia Legislature, by Resolution on November 1866, protested as follows:

Since the reorganization of the State government, Georgia has elected Senators and Representatives. So has every other State. They have been arbitrarily refused admission to their seats, not on the ground that the qualifications of the members elected did not conform to the fourth paragraph, second section, first article of the Constitution, but because their right of representation was denied by a portion of the States having equal but not greater rights than themselves. They have in fact been forcibly excluded; and, inasmuch as all legislative power granted by the States to Congress is defined, and this power of exclusion is not among the powers expressly or by implication, the assemblage, at the capitol, of representatives from a portion of the States, to the exclusion of the representatives of another portion, cannot be a constitutional Congress, when the representation of each State forms an integral part of the whole.

This amendment is tendered to Georgia for ratification, under that power in the Constitution which authorizes two-thirds of the Congress to propose amendments. We have endeavored to establish that Georgia had a right, in the first place, as part of the Congress to act upon the question, "Shall these amendments be proposed?" Every other excluded State had the same right.

The first constitutional privilege has been arbitrarily denied. Had these amendments been submitted to a constitutional Congress, they never would have been proposed to the States. Two-thirds of the whole Congress never would have proposed to eleven States voluntarily to reduce their political power in the Union, and at the same time, disfranchise the larger portion of the intellect, integrity and patriotism of the eleven co-equal States. (Georgia House Journal, November 9, 1866, pp. 66-67)

The Florida Legislature, by Resolution of December 5, 1866, protested as follows:

Let this alteration be made in the organic system and some new and more startling demands may or may not be required by the predominant party previous to allowing the ten States now unlawfully and unconstitutionally deprived of their right of representation to enter the Halls of the National Legislature. Their right of representation is guaranteed by the Constitution of this country and there is no act, not even that of rebellion, can deprive them of its exercise. (Florida House Journal, 1866)

The South Carolina Legislature by Resolution of November 27, 1866 protested as follows:

Eleven of the Southern States, including South Carolina, are deprived of their representation in Congress. Although their Senators and Representatives have been duly elected and have presented themselves for the purpose of taking their seats, their credentials have, in most instances, been laid upon the table without being read, or have been referred to a committee, who have failed to make any report on the subject. In short, Congress has refused to exercise its Constitutional functions, and decide either upon the election, the return, or the qualification of these selected by States and people to represent us. Some of the Senators and Representatives from the Southern States were prepared to take the test oath, but even these have been persistently ignored, and kept out of the seats to which they were entitled under the Constitution and laws. Hence this amendment has not been proposed by "two-thirds of both Houses" of a legally constituted Congress, and is not, Constitutionally or legitimately, before a single Legislature for ratification. (South Carolina House Journal, 1866, pp. 33 and 34)

The North Carolina Legislature protested by Resolution of December 6, 1866 as follows:

The Federal Constitution declares in substance, that Congress shall consist of a House of Representatives, composed of members apportioned among the respective States in the ratio of their population, and of a Senate, composed of two members from each State. And in the Article which concerns Amendments, it is expressly provided that 'no State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.' The contemplated Amendment was not proposed to the States by a Congress thus constituted. At the time of its adoption, the eleven seceding States were deprived of representation, both in the Senate and House, although they all, except the State of Texas, had Senators and Representatives duly elected and claiming their privileges under the Constitution. In consequence of this, these States had no voice on the important question of proposing the Amendment. Had they been allowed to give their votes, the proposition would doubtless have failed to command the required two-thirds majority.

If the votes of these States are necessary to a valid ratification of the Amendment, they were equally necessary on the question of proposing it to the States; for it would be difficult, in the opinion of the Committee, to show by what process in logic, men of intelligence could arrive at a different conclusion. (North Carolina Senate Journal, 1866-67, pp. 92 and 93.)
​

 

[johnwk]

So, once again the court fails to demonstrate the 14th Amendment was adopted to forbid the various State Governments from making distinctions based upon sex when issuing a state marriage license, and the court goes on to assume legislative power by second guessing the wisdom of legislation which is not the court’s function!

It doesn't sound like you've read the 14th amendment. Try it. I think it will help clear up a lot of your misconceptions on what the 14th was adopted to do. Pay special attention to the last half of section 1.

Wow! That was a mouthful. Now, how about explaining what you think the 14th Amendment was intended to accomplish.


JWK




The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it._____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASS'N v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)

 

[Skylar]

14th amendment wasn't presented or ratified legally... it was railroaded through for political reasons.

The courts recognize that the 14th amendment was legally ratified. Meaning that any ruling involving the 14th amendment will be based on that fact. Your personal interpretation of the validity of the 14th amendment is irrelevant to any court proceeding, as it won't effect the outcome of any case.

 

[Skylar]

So, once again the court fails to demonstrate the 14th Amendment was adopted to forbid the various State Governments from making distinctions based upon sex when issuing a state marriage license, and the court goes on to assume legislative power by second guessing the wisdom of legislation which is not the court’s function!

It doesn't sound like you've read the 14th amendment. Try it. I think it will help clear up a lot of your misconceptions on what the 14th was adopted to do. Pay special attention to the last half of section 1.

Wow! That was a mouthful. Now, how about explaining what you think the 14th Amendment was intended to accomplish.


JWK




The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it._____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASS'N v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)

Second guessing the constitutionality of legislation is exactly what the courts were designed to do. Look at the federalist papers on the topic, specifically federalist paper 78. Until the 14th amendment the States were not bound by the Bill of Rights. The purpose of the bill of rights per its advocates at the time of passage, was to extend the bill of rights to the States.

It has other purposes, but that's the one most relevant to our conversation.

Have you actually read the 14th Amendment? If no, I'd suggest it.

 

[Rotagilla]

14th amendment wasn't presented or ratified legally... it was railroaded through for political reasons.

The courts recognize that the 14th amendment was legally ratified. Meaning that any ruling involving the 14th amendment will be based on that fact. Your personal interpretation of the validity of the 14th amendment is irrelevant to any court proceeding, as it won't effect the outcome of any case.

Look here, jr law professor... I know the "courts" recognize it...that wasn't the point...

The point is it wasn't presented or ratified legally.
It was railroaded through by excluding the rightful legislators from southern states.
They did it illegally..and the reason was they knew the southern states wouldn't go for it...so instead of following the wishes of the majority, they rigged the system to exclude lawmakers they knew would oppose it... you like to play "lawyer"..then you'll know that the rules weren't followed so the 14th is (in reality) null and void...

Read the rest here...and for the whiners that don't like my source...type in "14th amendment unconstitutional" and pick the source YOU "like" best.

The Fourteenth Amendment is Unconstitutional - Judge L.H. Perez

The United States Constitution provides:

Article 1, Section 3. "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State ***"

Article V provides: "No State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate."

The fact that twenty-three (23) Senators had been unlawfully excluded from the U.S. Senate, in order to secure a two-thirds vote for adoption of the Joint Resolution proposing the 14th Amendment is shown by Resolutions of protest adopted by the following state legislatures:

 

[Skylar]

That's the whole point..leftists find activist circuit/appeals court judges who'll rule in their favor on an issue and bypass the constitution.

The problem with that interpretation is that conservatives only consider rulings by the court that they disagree with a 'bypass of the constitution'.

When the courts recognized the right to privacy and used it as the basis of the right to abortion, conservatives howled. As the right to privacy isn't articulated anywhere in the constitution.

Yet when the courts recognized the right to self defense with a firearm, conservatives cheered. Despite the fact that the right to self defense with a firearm is articulated no where in the constitution.

Its the exact same process; the courts recognizing unemumerated rights and protecting them. Logically, if such a process were invalid it would be invalid both cases. Or valid in both case. The 9th amendment makes it clear that its valid in both cases.

 

[Skylar]

I know the "courts" recognize it...that wasn't the point...

In terms of having any relevance to any court case, it really is the point. As nothing you've posted has any effect on the outcome of any case. Including any ruling the court may make on gay marriage.Making your argument inconsequential to the issues we're discussing.

 

[johnwk]

So, once again the court fails to demonstrate the 14th Amendment was adopted to forbid the various State Governments from making distinctions based upon sex when issuing a state marriage license, and the court goes on to assume legislative power by second guessing the wisdom of legislation which is not the court’s function!

It doesn't sound like you've read the 14th amendment. Try it. I think it will help clear up a lot of your misconceptions on what the 14th was adopted to do. Pay special attention to the last half of section 1.

Wow! That was a mouthful. Now, how about explaining what you think the 14th Amendment was intended to accomplish.


JWK




The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it._____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASS'N v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)

Second guessing the constitutionality of legislation is exactly what the courts were designed to do. Look at the federalist papers on the topic, specifically federalist paper 78. Until the 14th amendment the States were not bound by the Bill of Rights. The purpose of the bill of rights per its advocates at the time of passage, was to extend the bill of rights to the States.

It has other purposes, but that's the one most relevant to our conversation.

Have you actually read the 14th Amendment? If no, I'd suggest it.

For the second time, how about explaining what you think the 14th Amendment was intended to accomplish.


JWK



Those who reject and ignore abiding by the intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was agree to, as those intentions and beliefs may be documented from historical records, wish to remove the anchor and rudder of our constitutional system so they may then be free to “interpret” the Constitution to mean whatever they wish it to mean.

 

[Skylar]

For the second time, how about explaining what you think the 14th Amendment was intended to accomplish.

Let me restate my position, this time without the typo:

The purpose of the 14th amendment, per its advocates at the time of its passage, was to extend the Bill of Rights to the States.

 

[thereisnospoon]

What is the statute number of the new law the court created?

Ok smart ass, there is no possible answer to that question and you know it.
However, all you have to do is search for the 9th Circuit's decision which does essentially over turn a binding and legal legislative action.
In effect, the 9th Circuit wrote new law without writing it.

 

[bodecea]

14th amendment wasn't presented or ratified legally... it was railroaded through for political reasons.

The courts recognize that the 14th amendment was legally ratified. Meaning that any ruling involving the 14th amendment will be based on that fact. Your personal interpretation of the validity of the 14th amendment is irrelevant to any court proceeding, as it won't effect the outcome of any case.

Look here, jr law professor... I know the "courts" recognize it...that wasn't the point...

The point is it wasn't presented or ratified legally.
It was railroaded through by excluding the rightful legislators from southern states.
They did it illegally..and the reason was they knew the southern states wouldn't go for it...so instead of following the wishes of the majority, they rigged the system to exclude lawmakers they knew would oppose it... you like to play "lawyer"..then you'll know that the rules weren't followed so the 14th is (in reality) null and void...

Read the rest here...and for the whiners that don't like my source...type in "14th amendment unconstitutional" and pick the source YOU "like" best.

The Fourteenth Amendment is Unconstitutional - Judge L.H. Perez

The United States Constitution provides:

Article 1, Section 3. "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State ***"

Article V provides: "No State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate."

The fact that twenty-three (23) Senators had been unlawfully excluded from the U.S. Senate, in order to secure a two-thirds vote for adoption of the Joint Resolution proposing the 14th Amendment is shown by Resolutions of protest adopted by the following state legislatures:

Isn't it odd that the Supreme Court and all Federal Courts aren't as Constitutionally savvy as you.

 

[thereisnospoon]

So, once again the court fails to demonstrate the 14th Amendment was adopted to forbid the various State Governments from making distinctions based upon sex when issuing a state marriage license, and the court goes on to assume legislative power by second guessing the wisdom of legislation which is not the court’s function!

It doesn't sound like you've read the 14th amendment. Try it. I think it will help clear up a lot of your misconceptions on what the 14th was adopted to do. Pay special attention to the last half of section 1.

Yes. The Equal Protection clause. And?
In what way were anyone's right to due process denied?
Just answer that question.

 

[Skylar]

What is the statute number of the new law the court created?

Ok smart ass, there is no possible answer to that question and you know it.
However, all you have to do is search for the 9th Circuit's decision which does essentially over turn a binding and legal legislative action.
In effect, the 9th Circuit wrote new law without writing it.

Of course they have. One of the purposes of the Federal Judiciary is to determine the constitutionality of a given piece of legislation. That a piece of legislation has been passed doesn't mean its constiutional. If legislation violates rights, its invalid.

Take the gun control laws in Chicago overturned by the USSC in McDonald V. Chicago. They were binding and legal legislative actions. Yet they were also unconstitutional. And thus unenforceable. As rights trump powers.

 

[thereisnospoon]

14th amendment wasn't presented or ratified legally... it was railroaded through for political reasons.

The courts recognize that the 14th amendment was legally ratified. Meaning that any ruling involving the 14th amendment will be based on that fact. Your personal interpretation of the validity of the 14th amendment is irrelevant to any court proceeding, as it won't effect the outcome of any case.

Look here, jr law professor... I know the "courts" recognize it...that wasn't the point...

The point is it wasn't presented or ratified legally.
It was railroaded through by excluding the rightful legislators from southern states.
They did it illegally..and the reason was they knew the southern states wouldn't go for it...so instead of following the wishes of the majority, they rigged the system to exclude lawmakers they knew would oppose it... you like to play "lawyer"..then you'll know that the rules weren't followed so the 14th is (in reality) null and void...

Read the rest here...and for the whiners that don't like my source...type in "14th amendment unconstitutional" and pick the source YOU "like" best.

The Fourteenth Amendment is Unconstitutional - Judge L.H. Perez

The United States Constitution provides:

Article 1, Section 3. "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State ***"

Article V provides: "No State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate."

The fact that twenty-three (23) Senators had been unlawfully excluded from the U.S. Senate, in order to secure a two-thirds vote for adoption of the Joint Resolution proposing the 14th Amendment is shown by Resolutions of protest adopted by the following state legislatures:

Isn't it odd that the Supreme Court and all Federal Courts aren't as Constitutionally savvy as you.

Yeah right...Until a federal circuit or the SCOTUS hands down an opinion YOU don't like.
Cut the hypocritical bullshit.
You libs have been holding a years long bitch fest about SCOTUS because you believe every court should be liberal.

 

[Skylar]

Isn't it odd that the Supreme Court and all Federal Courts aren't as Constitutionally savvy as you.

That's the fun part of subjective legal arguments. They are predicated on a faulty line of authority, where the legal interpretations of the individual trump that of the courts and federal government.

Which obviously, they don't.

 

[Skylar]

Yeah right...Until a federal circuit or the SCOTUS hands down an opinion YOU don't like.
Cut the hypocritical bullshit.
You libs have been holding a years long bitch fest about SCOTUS because you believe every court should be liberal.

Oh, I've had USSC rulings that I disagree with. Citizens United, Kelo V. the City of New London, Hiibel v. the 6th District Court of Nevada, and others. But just because I disagree with them doesn't mean I don't recognize their authority. They are legal precedent. And they will effect future cases.