>>>Marbury vs. Madison says that the courts are subject to the Constitution. <<<
Okay. We’ve gone through this before. Show us how the courts acted un-Constitutionally. I won’t argue that it wasn’t crappy law. It was. But to say they acted un-Constitutionally—it just isn’t there.
It was perfectly within their limits to strike down a law that they found unconstitutional. Same thing happened in Iowa. It’s up to the legislatures to do something about it.
It's more accurate to say that they acted extra-constitutionally. Lawlessly. And Mitt Romney backed their play.
What law? There is still no law that allows gay marriage in Massachusetts. Or are you under the misimpression that courts make laws in a constitutional republic?