In the same thread as the last post, hatred towards gays is still de rigueur if one is a Republican candidate and there remains a competition in the GOP field as to who can most quench the hatred of the party base. Marco Rubio is trying hard to win that prize and has not outlined his plan as to how he would end marriage equality. Never mind that same sex marriage has caused no harm to anyone. It's simply the fact that it is against the violent, fantasy world of the Christian Taliban that makes up so much of the GOP base and seeks to inflict its Christian version of Sharia law on all. Think Progress looks at Rubio's plan that underscores his willingness to prostitute himself to haters in order up his numbers in polls. Meanwhile, same sex couples would be punished and rendered unequal before the law. Here are highlights:
In the landmark case of Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court found that same-sex marriage is a Constitutional right protected by the 14th Amendment.
Sunday on NBC’s Meet The Press, Marco Rubio pledged, as President, to change that.
Rubio said that he would not attempt to pass a constitutional amendment to return the question of same-sex marriage back to the sates. Rather, after numerous deflections, Rubio said he would simply appoint new Supreme Court justices who would overturn Obergefell.
CHUCK TODD: Are you going to work to overturn the same sex marriage?
MARCO RUBIO: I disagree with it on constitutional grounds. As I have said–
CHUCK TODD: But are you going to work to overturn this?
MARCO RUBIO: I think it’s bad law. . . . It’s not about discrimination. It is about the definition of a very specific, traditional, and age-old institution. If you want to change it, you have a right to petition your state legislature and your elected representatives to do it. What is wrong is that the Supreme Court has found this hidden constitutional right that 200 years of jurisprudence had not discovered and basically overturn the will of voters. . . .
MARCO RUBIO: It is the current law. I don’t believe any case law is settled law. Any future Supreme Court can change it. And ultimately, I will appoint Supreme Court justices that will interpret the Constitution as originally constructed.
The next president is likely to appoint multiple Supreme Court justices. By the time he or she is sworn in, one-third of the justices will be in their 80s.
Three of the five justices who voted in favor of marriage equality — Ruth Bader Ginsburg (82), Anthony Kennedy (79) and Stephen Breyer (77) — are among the oldest on the court.
Rubio’s pronouncement is significant because under the principle of stare decisis, justices traditionally respect the judgement of their predecessors even if they disagree. There are very conservative justices who disagree with the Obergefell decision but would vote to uphold it for that reason. Rubio is saying that he will appoint new justices who do not intend to respect the Obergefell decision.
Like her or not, Hillary Clinton would not appoint more justice like Antoni Scalia and Clarence Thomas to the court. Rubio has pledged that he would do so. This ought to frighten every thinking American.
1 comment:
Rubio says that no case law is ever settled. That is a radical idea that strikes at the heart of our system of law and governance. If no case law is ever settled, then justices and judges are being invited to ignore prior decisions. This is the most extreme judicial activism possible, and it will bring about precisely what Rubio claims he disagrees with: an unfettered activist judiciary who can decide whatever they want.
Post a Comment