Conservatives Dismiss CA Gay Marriage Decision By Falsely Attacking ‘Unelected Judges’

[marmar]

from ThinkProgress:



Conservatives Dismiss CA Gay Marriage Decision By Falsely Attacking ‘Unelected Judges’»

Responding to the California Supreme Court’s decision yesterday overturning the state’s ban on gay marriage, congressional conservatives attacked the decision by calling it the result of “unelected judges” turning over the will of the people.

Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO), the House Minority Whip, charged in a statement that “unelected judges” are trying to “substitute their own worldview for the wisdom of the American people”:

Today, the decision of unelected judges to overturn the will of the people of California on the question of same-sex marriage demonstrates the lengths that unelected judges will go to substitute their own worldview for the wisdom of the American people.

Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL), piled on, saying that “unelected judges” had “irresponsibly decided to legislate from the bench.”

But, in making their rush to judgment about the CA decision, both Blunt and Feeney have the basic facts wrong about how California’s judicial system works. SmartVoter.org, a resource of the League of Women’s Voters, makes clear that California’s Supreme Court justices are “confirmed by the public at the next general election” after being appointed and “justices also come before voters at the end of their 12-year terms.”

In fact, each of the seven justices involved in yesterday’s decision were approved by California voters by overwhelming margins:

- Justice Joyce L. Kennard confirmed in 2006 with 74.5% of the vote.
- Justice Carol A. Corrigan confirmed in 2006 with 74.4% of the vote.
- Justice Kathryn M. Werdegar confirmed in 2002 with 74.1% of the vote.
- Justice Carlos R. Moreno confirmed in 2002 with 72.6% of the vote.
- Justice Marvin R. Baxter confirmed in 2002 with 71.5% of the vote.
- Justice Ronald M. George confirmed in 1998 with 75.5% of the vote.
- Justice Ming William Chin confirmed in 1998 with 69.3% of the vote.

The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder notes that Feeney’s statement on the decision also engages in “coded gay baiting” when he informs “Florida’s hardworking families” that he “will continue to fight to prevent San Francisco taxes and values from infiltrating our community.”


http://thinkprogress.org/2008/05/16/blunt-gay-marriage/

[NJSecularist]

1. The Supreme Court's job is to protect the rights of the minority

from being taken away by the tyranically majority.

It is the Supreme Court's job to interpret the Constitution.

If 95% of California's voted in a ballot initiative to ban all conservative writers from California or they would be subject to a felony, that would obviously be overturned.

Same thing here.

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. LOL I love catching Roy Blunt being stupid

:rofl:

[BrklynLib at work]

3. Correction of my original post:

Ronnie Ray-Gun

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/16/EDV410N7AO.DTL

...
However, it would be hard to come up with a more perfect figure to defuse the issue and redefine the debate - as a plain matter of civil rights - than the 68-year-old Justice George. First appointed to the municipal bench by Gov. Ronald Reagan in 1972, and promoted to the Supreme Court by Gov. Pete Wilson in 1991, the unpretentious George is highly respected for his even temperament, hard work and judicial restraint. No one could credibly dismiss this ruling as the work of an "activist" judge - try as they might
...

[BOSSHOG]

4. I'm all for banning gays from getting married

as long as that law is tied to one banning christians from getting divorced. "Til death do us part." Guess that don't mean shit to zealots. And its so sad that it must take activist voters to save the sanctity of marriage, which also don't mean shit to zealots.

[BrklynLib at work]

5. They are very, very few zealots who are not also hypocrites.

I believe that virtually every zealot I have met or read about, was also a hypocrite.


NOTE: Someday I will learn to use spellcheck before hitting post

[and-justice-for-all]

8. That is exactly what I have said..

If I can not marry whom I choose, They should not have the right to divorce!

[sfaprog]

6. Don't remember hearing any bitching about the "unelected judges" who handed the presidency to Bush.

:eyes:

[newmajority]

7. I wonder if Blunt & Feeney realize that this is a CONSERVATIVE court?

Or at least that's what I heard yesterday.... majority are Republican judges.

Not to mention that Ahnold and John McCain both say they support the court's decision.

Republicans really don't have a leg to stand on here.

[BOSSHOG]

9. More importantly to blunt and feeney

THEY KNOW THEIR AUDIENCE. Ignorant trash who have "conservative values" who never check whatever comes out of the mouth of garbage like blunt, and he knows it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. DING, DING, DING, DING, DING

give the man a cigar!