NOM says today is 'stench' that 'stained the Supreme Court'
Smells sweet to me. A group that just suffered its most crushing repudiation yet has another opinion:
NOM Sharply Condemns US Supreme Court Over Illegitimate Ruling Legislating From The Bench on Marriage and Rewarding Corrupt Politicians and Federal Judges on Prop 8 and DOMA
Published: Today, 3:30 PM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 26, 2013
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Jen Campbell (703-683-5004)
"There's a stench coming from this case that has now stained the Supreme Court. It's imperative that Congress continue to protect the right of states to not recognize faux marriages in their state." — Brian Brown
Washington, DC — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today expressed dismay and outrage at the US Supreme Court's actions to dismiss Proposition 8 on procedural grounds, and for invalidating a key element of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The group called the decision "illegitimate" and that it will be rejected by tens of millions of Americans, and demanded that Congress continue to protect the right of states to reject same-sex marriages performed in other states or countries.
"In a miscarriage of justice the US Supreme Court has refused to consider the decision of a single federal court judge to overturn the perfectly legal action of over 7 million California voters who passed Proposition 8 defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman," said Brain Brown, NOM's president. "The Supreme Court's holding that proponents of an initiative had no legal right to appeal ignores California law and rewards corrupt politicians for abandoning their duty to defend traditional marriage laws. It's imperative that Congress continue to preserve the right of states to protect true marriage and refuse to recognize faux marriages performed in other states or countries."
Proposition 8 was passed with over 52% of the vote, capturing the support of over 7 million California voters. Because they opposed the measure and receive political support from homosexual groups and activists, both then-Attorney General (now Governor) Jerry Brown and his successor, Attorney General Kamala Harris, refused to defend Proposition 8. The case was heard by a homosexual judge in San Francisco who himself was engaged in a long-term same-sex relationship. To nobody's surprise, the judge invalidated Proposition 8. This decision was upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in an opinion written by liberal judge Stephen Reinhardt, despite the fact that Reinhardt's wife advised the plaintiff lawyers in this very case. Reinhardt refused to recuse himself from the case.
"There is a stench coming from this case that has now stained the Supreme Court. They've allowed corrupt politicians and judges to betray the voters, rewarding them for their betrayal. It's an illegitimate decision. We and millions of other Americans will refuse to accept this rogue decision rewarding corruption. " Brown said.
The Supreme Court invalidated Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage under federal law as the union of one man and one woman. Section 2 of DOMA, which codified the long-standing right of states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states or countries, remains in effect and was not challenged. "We also urge Congress to reject the inevitable attempts to dismantle remaining elements of DOMA, including the right of states to refuse to recognize so-called gay marriages performed elsewhere. The vast majority of American voters have expressed with their votes their desire to maintain marriage as the union of one man and one woman. That decision should be respected and left undisturbed."
Despite the ruling on Proposition 8, the decision leaves intact the marriage amendments adopted by thirty other states as the Court refused to find a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, as celebrity lawyers David Boies and Ted Olsen had been urging throughout the case. More importantly, the DOMA ruling, which turns on the primacy of the states in setting marriage policy, calls into serious question the correctness of Judge Vaughn Walker's initial decision invalidating Proposition 8.
"The only other saving grace of the Supreme Court's decisions today is that they refused to go along with the urgings of Ted Olsen and David Boies to find a constitutional right to same-sex ‘marriage,'" Brown said. "The plaintiffs failed in their primary objective, which is a major victory for those defending Proposition 8, especially Chuck Cooper and his firm, along with the attorneys at the Alliance Defending Freedom, and Andy Pugno of the Prop 8 Legal Defense Fund."
NOM was the biggest contributor to putting Proposition 8 on the ballot. The case was Hollingsworth v. Perry. The DOMA case was Windsor v. United States.
You "refuse to accept" it, NOM? What exactly does that mean?
comments powered by Disqus