Sessions: Prop 8 Ruling Shows Danger of Judicial Activism

[mewimi]

This man is sick, a huge hypocrite. What he wants is to kill the judicial branch LOL because they might be making a decision based on what they believe to be the law? Thats insane,

Marriage since the founding of the "republic" has been between a man and a woman? Actually thats FALSE, the ban against same sex couples from marrying was RECENT and the definition of "Man and a woman" was also RECENT in law.

This guy is a ranter who has no defense.

[chicraig6421]

I wonder if he really believes what he says. If he does he is out of touch with the Constitution. Maybe he believes Women shouldn't have the right to vote. Maybe he believes whites and blacks, or Jew and Christians for that matter, should be prohibited from marriage. Wonder what he really believes.

[Muzzy337]

If it was Adam and Steve instead of Adam and Eve, we wouldn't be here.

[microflex22]

I can't wait until this goes to the Supreme Court. Our rights are unalienable, and it's only a matter of time before they become the law of the land. Thank you Judge Walker.

[microflex22]

The Constitution is enduring, unlike public opinion. Misinformation had tainted the prop 8 vote. Along with the health care debate for that matter. But that's part of the genius of The Constitution.

[spidermanstailor]

I'm not even religious and I can see the unnatural side of gay marriage. Oh well..in todays libtard society I guess any stupid idea can become law eh?

[Timd63]

If marriage isn't defined in the Constitution, then by Virtue of the 10th Amendment to the Constitution, which states that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.", the people and the State of California had the RIGHT to define how marriage will be recognized in THEIR State. The people voted and the law was PASSED. This homosexual activist judge VIOLATED his oath!

[MinGophers]

Saying Prop 8 is unconstitutional is NOT activism. Saying Prop 8 is necessary is big government where the gov should not be. It is not the governments job to say who you can and cannot marry. Get it right Sessions. You're imposing YOUR views and hoping the judges do the same.

You don't put civil rights up to a vote.

[Rhapsody564]

Let's separate the apples from the oranges. Homosexuality is a behavior, and it is society that determines the norms for behaviors. It is the decision of the people, and the people only, to determine these issues. It pisses me off seeing the gay community continually compare themselves to black and women rights of the past. You are in totally a different bracket.

[chicraig6421]

@Rhapsody564 You said 'totality a different bracket' - I think thats the point of the 14th Amendment and the Judges ruling. Ya can't make a 'different bracket', a different class of people, people not equal to others. You are correct the US did go through this with both women & 'blacks', now with gays. Can't make them a different class, an unequal class. Unless ya go back and make sodomy illegal again., and good luck with that. If sodomy was illegal than maybe the state could make more laws.

[hellboundmatt]

Since laws have never been and will NEVER be based on "morals " or majority rules concerning rights .You have no legal standing and your "case" against gay marriage will be destroyed via the 14th amendment. He IS not an activist Judge he is following the Constitution. Murder and theft are not illegal because they're immoral but because it does harm and destabilizes society. Get it straight. please Educate yourselves on the country you CONservatives pretend to love.

[JeremyAlanBrady]

@hellboundmatt

"Since laws have never been and will NEVER be based on 'morals' "

Of course laws are based on morals. What planet are you from? All laws are based on morals. Study up on the history of law and you might learn some things instead of making things up that suit your belief system.

[Bmuskie]

@ 0:45 but isn't banning gay marriage and saying that a marriage is only a union between a man and a woman forcing me to redefine my view of marriage?

@ 1:25 - Some founding fathers did have the foresight to know that at times the majority would take action to strip rights and freedoms away from the minority which is why the 14th ammendment was added.

[Skintrinsic]

@Bmuskie Given that marriage has historically been that to begin with(at least in this country), it would really be asking you to re-redefine your view of marriage. I thought the guy's main point was the giving a minority the ability to define something doesn't make sense.

Not founding fathers, then. The 14th amendment was adopted about 80 years after the founding of our nation. And since the right to marry someone of the same sex has never been recognized here, it can't be "stripped".

[ch5342]

The decision of Judge Walker was brilliantly justified with previous SCOTUS cases citations and more. He took A LOT of time to review ALL the material before arriving to his decision, and still call him "activist judge"? You people make me sick.

[salitica]

@ch5342 they are little children when they lose

[kenballer00]

in the case called Citizens for equal protection v. Bruning, it dealt with a federal 8th circuit court OVERRULING a lower district court decision that somehow there was no rational basis under the equal protection of the 14th amendment to deny gay marriage in an attempt to overturn the people's vote.The higher court reversed that decision to criticize the judge's fallicious ruling and explained exactly why there is rational basis. which means your case means nothing in the grand scheme of things

[JeremyAlanBrady]

@ch5342

You make me sick too.