Posted on 10/10/2015 6:31:23 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
A state judge in Alabama is arguing that since the U.S. Supreme Court – a branch of the federal government – created “same-sex marriage,” Washington can just go ahead and administer the licenses.
The arguments come in a new court filing from Probate Judge John Enslen. In Alabama, probate judges are the only ones authorized to issue marriage licenses.
WND reported just days ago that in Alabama, the state Supreme Court still has pending a case regarding how the state should implement the U.S. Supreme Court’s marriage ruling.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s June 26 decision, a federal judge in Alabama had demanded endorsement of “same-sex marriage,” and the Alabama Supreme Court issued a permanent injunction forbidding it.
When the Supreme Court’s ruling was announced, the state Supreme Court said it would accept comments on how the decision would impact in the state. But the state Supreme Court has not ruled yet.
Several probate judges now are asking the state Supreme Court to rule, and in a new filing with the state court, Enslen suggests the issue can be resolved.
He said he “petitions this Supreme Court of the state of Alabama to issue a declaratory judgment, order, and decree holding that the state of Alabama will honor and recognize same-sex marriage license that are duly issued by the federal government of these United States, or duly issued by a state government that has adopted the civil right of same-sex marriage as a matter of that state’s law.”
But, he said, the ruling should further say “that the state of Alabama will not issue state same-sex marriage licenses or recognize purported state same-sex marriage license that have been issued in contradiction to the current Constitution of the state of Alabama or the current state law of any other sister state.”
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
That’s some masterful foot-dragging, and I say that in all admiration.
“A state judge in Alabama is arguing that since the U.S. Supreme Court – a branch of the federal government – created “same-sex marriage,” Washington can just go ahead and administer the licenses.”
That’s correct.
The federal government created the law.
Let the federal government enforce the law.
But this process is way out of control...
1. The supreme court created a law.
[Judicial Branch created a law.]
2. The federal court system has to enforce the law.
[Judicial Branch enforces the law.]
I don’t think this is the way it supposed to work!!!
Tyrants in black robes aren’t going to let a little thing like the Constitution get in their way.
When these federal tyrant judges began striking down state laws on marriage, Governors and AGs should have immediately stood up for their citizens.
Same sex marriage is not a constitutional right any more than a 45 yr old woman marrying her 15 year old son is a constitutional right. Such things need to be voted on, and if passed, to become law. Alabama has not passed such a law allowing gays to marry (or moms to marry their sons) at this time. As with all laws, one can disagree with this decision by Alabama (or agree with it) but, the intellectual principled point is Alabama has the right to do what it wants. Period.
Forcing the Feds to issue the marriage license is masterful snark. I hope they stick to it.
The ego ridden Supreme Court has somehow morphed into a dictatorial legislative body instead of the protector of the constitution they were meant to be. The intellectual vapidity of some our justices is just sad. It all started with Roe Vs Wade...if not sooner.
We are a nation of laws. Not men. Or has the Supreme court reversed that fact too?
Good plan.
Eff the feds.
As I have said before, the solution is to have same sex licenses issued by the state. In the courthouse have a dot matrix printer hooked up to a state web site that generates the very special same sex licenses. Put this PC/printer in the corner of the marriage license office and it is self service and requires no personal contact from the local county officials.
What WRITTEN law was produced by the USSC? The House or Senate WRITES Federal laws. The UNCONSTITUTIONAL black-robed tyrants only “created” an abominable ruling not a law. Ain’t their job.
The US Constitution isn’t a tough read, and it’s not too difficult to understand.
Why don’t we just go one step further, dump all these clerks and paper-bureaucrats....and have everything done via a web-site at state level and you print it out at home. Charge the requirement off your credit card, and if you want some marriage ceremony conducted....pay $60 extra and a Skype session will start with some on-line minister or state-approved minister.
I don’t see any reason to have clerks around except for car registration purposes. My hunting license was granted via a on-line registration last year. You should be able to dump half the clerks in any state office operation by going to this route.
I simply can’t understand why there is no uprising over this obvious tyranny. Washington acts as though it is business as usual and the rest of the country just yawns. Why is our side so silent? There ought to be huge rallies in support of Kim Davis and others like her who have stood against the overreach of the judicial branch.
If, as the Supreme Court claims, marriage is a civil right, then government has no right to issue licenses (permits) for it. We license privileges, not rights. Thus, this judge is correct and so is Kim Davis.
They too further FUBAR’d the works by implying a Right (to marriage) requires a license (permission from govt).
I like what some States are doing....doing AWAY with licensing all together. Stir the puddin’ even more, overload the system and kick that sh!t right back in their face(s).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.