JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT REDEFINES MARRIAGE.
On the domestic side, the California Supreme Court re-opened the issue of same-sex marriage with its 4-3 decision substituting its will for the will of the people on the matter (vote for Proposition 22: 61%). This is certainly an emotional issue for many people, and understandably so. Yet, Republicans can agree that it is not the role of the judiciary to fundamentally redefine the basic tenets of society. That is a function appropriate for the legislative process, and Governor Schwarzenegger has consistently vetoed bills aimed at reversing Proposition 22. (See today's Wall Street Journal editorial.)
It will be interesting to see how Barack Obama tip-toes around this issue. Make no mistake: the activists behind his campaign insist on rewriting the definition of marriage as a beginning, rather than an end point, on their agenda of social engineering.
When we witness judicial activism, it's worth noting that the legislative branch -- that closest to the people -- is outlined in the Constitution's Article I, while the branch most removed from the people, the judiciary, is described in its Article III. The judiciary is intended to interpret laws, not make them, as the California Supreme Court in his case has chosen to do.
Significantly, the state Republican Party has already endorsed the November constitutional amendment ballot initiative that would reverse this court decision by putting Proposition 22 into the state constitution, as other states have done.
Friday, May 16, 2008
California Republican Party Chair Ron Nehring on gay marriage ruling
In which Chairman Nehring expresses pride that the California GOP is opposed to equality for all citizens: