June 30th, 2010

The Wisconsin Supreme Court rejected a legal challenge to the state’s constitution ban on gay marriage 7-0.

And they should have.

Not because the ban is a good thing…I voted against it.

But because this particular lawsuit was legalistic bullshit and a waste of time.

Entry Filed under: Observations

5 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Nick  |  June 30th, 2010 at 9:05 am

    It would’ve served em right to have the ban struck down for legalistic bullshit though. Because frankly… legalistic bullshit is held against us all the time. It would have been nice to have people hoisted by their own petard.

    If they can simply ignore the Constitution which guarantees Equal Protection Under the Law… then what defense is left?

  • 2. Elliot  |  June 30th, 2010 at 9:10 am

    They didn’t ignore it. They amended it.

    I wouldn’t have amended it that way, but the best way to undo a bad amendment is with another amendment.

    We’ve all heard of the 18th and 21st Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, right?

  • 3. Nick  |  June 30th, 2010 at 10:08 am

    Equal Protection Under the Law is guaranteed in the Federal Constitution. It cannot be amended or eliminated by the State. See, Supremacy Clause for details.

  • 4. Elliot  |  June 30th, 2010 at 10:48 am

    But this wasn’t a Federal suit.

    Eventually, the U.S. Supreme Court may overturn the various state bans on gay marriage. But, then again, it may not.

    I think you can argue that defining marriage as being only between only one man and one woman doesn’t violate the equal protection clause.

    I’m not going to argue that here, but I think it’s an argument that could prevail. Especially, considering the current makeup of the court.

  • 5. Nick  |  July 1st, 2010 at 4:32 pm

    Well sure… its an argument that can prevail. After all, how many times have arguments prevailed that limit our freedom of speech despite the 1st Amendment?

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.