Thursday, November 13, 2014

Brian Brown is mightily pissed

Brian S. Brown - National Organization for Marriage
Brian S. Brown - National Organization for Marriage
Apparently Brian Brown thinks that Kansas should disobey a federal court over marriage equality. This in spite of the fact that the United States Supreme Court refused to issue a stay by a vote of seven to two. Brown, leader of the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage has some harsh words for those seven justices:
The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today sharply condemned the United States Supreme Court for refusing to grant a stay of a federal judge's order imposing same-sex marriage in Kansas, and called on Governor Sam Brownback to order local clerks to refuse to issue marriage licenses that violate Kansas law defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Mr. Brown knows perfectly well that Kansas falls within the Tenth Circuit where the Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court ruling in favor of equality. The Supreme Court (by at least six to three) decided not to hear the case. Therefore, marriage equality is the law in the Tenth Circuit.

Does Brown expect Governor Brownback to violate the law? What? Are we going back to George Wallace in the schoolhouse door? That didn't exactly carve an endearing place in history for Governor Wallace. Brown must be off his meds because:
The United States Supreme Court is creating a constitutional confrontation by refusing to hear an appeal of lower court decisions imposing same-sex marriage. These lower court decisions are illegitimate.
Illegitimate? Why, because the Catholic Church (for which NOM is a proxy) doesn't like the outcome? But let's have some Tenther ranting leaving one to wonder if these folks were taught basic civics:
They violate the overarching constitutional principle that powers not specifically granted to the federal government are reserved to the states.
Followed by a misrepresentation of the ruling in United States v. Windsor:
The US Supreme Court has specifically recognized in the Windsor case that the regulation of marriage has always been a state function, and this remains so. 
Followed by the irrelevant:
The Kansas Supreme Court has previously issued an order blocking a lower state court judge from directing local clerks to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples in violation of state law. Local clerks who issue marriage licenses are considered judicial officers under Kansas Law.
Followed by some truth for a change:
… a federal judge in Utah ruled that Utah's marriage amendment was unconstitutional, and the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling. The US Supreme Court subsequently refused to hear Utah's appeal of that ruling. Since Kansas is also in the 10th Circuit, federal District Judge Daniel Crabtree recently issued an injunction against the state enforcing its marriage amendment. The ruling has created substantial legal confusion in the state.
I said some truth. There is absolutely no confusion. None at all.  We all know perfectly well what the law is in Kansas with respect to marriage. Kansas is a marriage equality state. I would argue that the Supreme Court has also telegraphed its intention to overturn the decision of the Sixth Circuit upholding these marriage bans.

Concluded with the crazy:
The question for the people of Kansas, and indeed the nation, is whether we are going to allow an illegitimate order by federal judges to trump state law and the vote of 70% of the Kansas electorate. Fifty million Americans in over thirty states have voted in support of traditional marriage and it's time that states fight back to protect the decision of those voters.
This guy needs some lithium.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.