Rep. Steve King Marriage Legislation: Iowa Congressman Introduces Bill To Strip Federal Courts Of Ri
Source: INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS TIMES
Rep. Steve King Marriage Legislation: Iowa Congressman Introduces Bill To Strip Federal Courts Of Right To Hear Cases For Marrying
By Elizabeth Whitman @elizabethwhitty e.whitman@ibtimes.com on April 22 2015 6:09 PM EDT
Republican U.S. Rep. Steve King introduced legislation Wednesday that would strip federal courts of the jurisdiction to hear cases related to marriage of any kind. The Iowa congressman said his bill, called the Restrain the Judges on Marriage Act of 2015, would prevent courts from "destroying traditional marriage." The bill marks the latest effort by the representative to limit ways to allow gay marriage.
"Federal courts have perverted the Constitution to make law and create constitutional rights to things such as privacy, birth control, and abortion," King said in a statement, all of which he said were not envisioned when the country was founded.
In 2012, King introduced an amendment to ban same-sex marriages in military facilities or by military chaplains. In 2014, he told the Jefferson Herald, What was a sin 2,000 years ago is a sin today, adding that he did not expect gays to go to heaven. King has also suggested that same-sex marriage is a purely socialist concept that is aimed at undermining individual rights and liberties. In 2009, after Iowa legalized gay marriage, King warned that Iowa would become the Mecca for same sex marriage.
I support traditional family values, Kings website currently says. The union between a man and a woman is the building block of the family and the cornerstone of our society, it adds, suggesting the United States should pass a constitutional amendment to that effect.
-snip-
Read more: http://www.ibtimes.com/rep-steve-king-marriage-legislation-iowa-congressman-introduces-bill-strip-federal-1892523
catbyte
(34,476 posts)liberal N proud
(60,347 posts)Is that even legal?
Gothmog
(145,650 posts)This is called court stripping or jurisdiction stripping http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction_stripping
Congress may define the jurisdiction of the judiciary through the simultaneous use of two powers.[1] First, Congress holds the power to create (and, implicitly, to define the jurisdiction of) federal courts inferior to the Supreme Court (i.e. Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and various other Article I and Article III tribunals). This court-creating power is granted both in the congressional powers clause (Art. I, § 8, Cl. 9) and in the judicial vesting clause (Art. III, § 1). Second, Congress has the power to make exceptions to and regulations of the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. This court-limiting power is granted in the Exceptions Clause (Art. III, § 2). By exercising these powers in concert, Congress may effectively eliminate any judicial review of certain federal legislative or executive actions and of certain state actions, or alternatively transfer the judicial review responsibility to state courts by "knocking [federal courts]...out of the game."[1]
Archae
(46,356 posts)Female OR male?
brooklynite
(94,785 posts)Point 2: This would in no way affect the Supreme Court, so this would be meaningless pandering.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)coming, and that the conservatives won't be able to count on their swing vote.
1monster
(11,012 posts)limit or manipulate their powers as Supreme Court Justices.
Even if this legislation pases and is signed into law, all the SC has to do is to declare it Unconstituional and it is gone.
Gothmog
(145,650 posts)The man is sad
rickford66
(5,528 posts)The rthuglicans don't mind turning to Federal Courts to support their religious leaning laws.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)xfundy
(5,105 posts)and putting out in public during election season. thanks!
Stainless
(718 posts)Instead, he goes around throwing dirt and behaving like a crybaby and a bully.
xfundy
(5,105 posts)Yeah, just try to live without good decorators, caterers, artists, designers, philosophers, florists, hair cutters, mathematical geniuses, and music (so many others not listed) up there.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)What is wrong with Northwest Iowa?
niyad
(113,600 posts)betty bowers explains traditional marriage to everyone else:
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)All of them.
That's a traditional marriage between one man and several hundred women.
allan01
(1,950 posts)please point out this in the Constitution please .