Unfortunately, rational thought is in the minority on the court.

Justice Scalia, however, presented a clear rebuke of the majority in his dissent.  Here are some highlights:

◾”The world does not expect logic and precision in poetry or inspirational pop philosophy; it demands them in the law. The stuff contained in today’s opinion has to diminish this Court’s reputation for clear thinking and sober analysis.”
◾”When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, every State limited marriage to one man and one woman, and no one doubted the constitutionality of doing so. That resolves these cases.”
◾”Buried beneath the mummeries and straining-to-be-memorable passages of the opinion is a candid and startling assertion: No matter what it was the People ratified, the Fourteenth Amendment protects those rights that the Judiciary, in its ‘reasoned judgment,’ thinks the Fourteenth Amendment ought to protect.”
◾”This is a naked judicial claim to legislative—indeed, super-legislative—power; a claim fundamentally at odds with our system of government.”
◾”But what really astounds is the hubris reflected in today’s judicial Putsch. The five Justices who compose today’s majority are entirely comfortable concluding that every State violated the Constitution for all of the 135 years between the Fourteenth Amendment’s ratification and Massachusetts’ permitting of same-sex marriages in 2003.”
◾”The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic.”
◾”It is one thing for separate concurring or dissenting opinions to contain extravagances, even silly extravagances, of thought and expression; it is something else for the official opinion of the Court to do so.”
◾” Who ever thought that intimacy and spirituality  were freedoms? And if intimacy is, one would think Freedom of Intimacy is abridged rather than expanded by marriage. Ask the nearest hippie. Expression, sure enough, is a freedom, but anyone in a long-lasting marriage will attest that that happy state constricts, rather than expands, what one can prudently say.”
◾”If, even as the price to be paid for a fifth vote, I ever joined an opinion for the Court that began: ‘The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity,’ I would hide my head in a bag. The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie.”

Perhaps the defining statement of the Scalia dissent was this profoundly true assertion,

“I write separately to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy”

President Ronald Reagan got it right when he appointed Scalia to the court.

***Gordon Howie is an author and CEO of Life and Liberty Media***

     “It’s not about right or left, it’s about Right or Wrong.”

 

 

 

We need your help:

• Pray
• Make a small (or large) donation
• “friend” me on facebook for daily updates
• SHARE the articles on this site with your network