The decision was not about religious marriage, not about lifestyles, not about politics, not about sex. It was neither a jump off the historical path of the court nor a lurch into “judicial activism.” It was simply another in a continuing line of decisions that preserve and protect the rights of all Iowans. It was groundbreaking only in the sense that few other states have recognized same-sex marriage. But — as the unanimity of the decision illustrated — it was a decision that was logical in its reasoning and demanded by the Iowa constitution.
This is a thoughtful, well-researched article that taught me something I recommend that you click here to go read it.
1 comment:
It seems to me that those who are so all-fired up to vote out these three justices--whe are all, remember, Republican appointees--are pretty much clueless about just what it is that the Supreme Court is supposed to do, and equally clueless about the separation of powers among the branches of government.
If it weren't so sad, it would be amusing to note that, at the federal level, the Roberts court is perhaps the most activist court this country has seen for at least seven decades, and probably longer.
Post a Comment