06-28-2013, 05:40 PM
(06-28-2013, 04:32 AM)Alram Wrote: Ignoring the content of Prop 8, and looking at only the procedures or events, we have, if I understand it correctly, a situation where the people in a state voted for and passed an amendment to their state constitution. The executive branch declined to enforce it or defend it in court. Those who were instrumental in getting the state amendment passed were found to have no legal standing.
This isn't really correct. I don't think there was any failure of enforcement, and the state defended it up to (but not including) the Ninth Circuit.
Quote:This would appear to set a precedent that the will of the people can be overturned by an indifferent executive branch or by non elected judges. Has this happened before? Is this a legal precedent that makes anyone else uncomfortable?
Here's where you go off the rails. A precedent? Like the Supreme Court hasn't ever, ever overruled anything, never gone against popular opinion? That's what they're there for, to ensure the rights of the minority are not trampled by the majority. The will of the people does not determine the rights of the governed.
Additionally, the unelected state of judges is intended to place them outside the pressures of pandering to political interests and place them above the fickle winds of public opinion. If you think electing judges is better, take a look at Texas.
As for the executive branch being indifferent, you say "indifferent", I say "principled", or more likely "politically savvy". They are, despite your rather obsolete sense of the "will of the people", bending to the will of the people by not defending Prop8.