“Entry of judgment shall be stayed for 180 days to permit the Legislature to take such action as it may deem appropriate in light of this opinion.”
Mitt Romney should have declined to implement it until the legislature passed a law ratifying this decision and setting up a mechanism for implementing it. Then he should have vetoed the law, if it did not suit him. Instead, when the legislature failed to act, he just blithely went ahead and complied.
Was he afraid that the same legislature that lacked the will to confront the Goodridge decision would impeach him because he refused to implement it? A leader does not comply with ultra vires acts by another branch out of fear.
And contempt? Who would enforce these contempt citations? The executive branch, that is who. Instead of executive orders to the Clerks of Court, Romney could have issued executive orders to the state police and the National Guard not to enforce any contempt orders. His approval would have gone through the roof, and it would have been the right constitutional response to this abominable decision.
The fact that this “Harvard” lawyer (must be freshly minted if he is just a First Lieutenant) equates such a response with “George Wallace” and expresses fear of what the media would say tell me all I need to know about him and about Mitt. A REAL LEADER DOES NOT WORRY ABOUT WHAT THE MEDIA IS GOING TO SAY. HE IS FAITHFUL TO HIS OATH OF OFFICE AND THE PUBLIC TRUST THAT THE PEOPLE HAVE PLACED IN HIM. Mitt Romney fails both the constitutional and the intestinal fortitude tests. He is not presidential material.
BTW, I am not surprised that you resort to ad hominem attacks against the organization and individual in Massachusetts that is exposing Romney’s record. All I have to say is the GOP and the country owes them a debt of gratitude.
So, you can throw out all the half truths, personal judgments based on flawed assumptions of character and an avalanche of logical fallacies based on the aforementioned lies, that's truth telling. But pointing out the lies is an ad hominem attack. Typical. Most extremists use this tactic. They say the most outrageous, slanderous thing possible about their intended target and then when confronted about the veracity of their statements and conclusions, whimper about how unfair and mean people are being to them. Typical bully. Stand up to them and they run home to mom, crying.