[weegee]

I stand opposed to judicial tyranny. Let the legislature overturn the law, not the courts. It is only being done away with now to set the stage for further legislating from the bench.

[k2blader]

You are right.

But supporters of promiscuity will not see it that way.

[NJ_gent]

"Let the legislature overturn the law, not the courts. It is only being done away with now to set the stage for further legislating from the bench."

I do agree to an extent, and I absolutely agree that no court should write new law. That said, I also must agree with the judicial review concept, as it does seem to naturally flow with the checks and balances set up for our government's branches. So long as the ruling is restricted to striking down the law, as opposed to creating new law, I can probably go along with it. Should the legislature feel that strongly opposed to this ruling, it does indeed have the ultimate authority to pass an amendment to the state constitution which would overrule the court's decision.

[DBeers]

I stand opposed to judicial tyranny. Let the legislature overturn the law, not the courts. It is only being done away with now to set the stage for further legislating from the bench.

Agreed -contravening the legislative process by cherry picking judicial fiat causes disorder often contravening the moral will of the people.