Tag: judge
UPDATE: The Latest States to Fall: Utah, Indiana, Wisconsin
Posted on July 10, 2014 in Marriage by Nathan Cherry
I’ve been following the judicial activism in states with traditional marriage laws as federal judges, acting alone, usurp the will of the people and enact sweeping changes unilaterally. For previous comments on states that have had marriage redefined for them within the past year or so, scroll down to see an earlier post. (Or click here for my first post on the subject.)
The first post centered around 13 states – conservative states – where marriage was being threatened by judicial activism. Since that first post, much has changed. Two more states were added, Georgia and Wisconsin. Of the original 13 both Utah and Indiana have now had marriage redefined for them – along with Wisconsin.
All in all this means that 15 conservative states where marriage laws protected natural, one man one woman marriage by a vote of the people have now had those laws wiped out by a single judge. That fact should trouble ever freedom loving American that believes our Constitution stands as a barrier to such radical activism.
For news regarding the decision in Indiana you can click here. For news on what is happening in Wisconsin you can click here. For news on what is happening in Utah you can click here.
Another One (Three Marriage Protection Laws) Bites the Dust
Posted on May 26, 2014 in Marriage by Nathan Cherry
Judge strikes down Idaho marriage protection law.
Judge strikes down Arkansas marriage protection law.
Judge strikes down Oregon marriage protection law.
The disturbing trend of judicial activism that continues to plague our country has claimed more victims. I’ve previously written about what is happening in a number of states regarding marriage. The previous article centered on 13 states: Pennsylvania, Virginia, Oklahoma, Utah, Kentucky, Colorado, Oregon, Texas, Michigan,
Tennessee, Indiana, Florida, and Ohio.
In each of these states federal judges or a combination of federal judges and state legislatures (in cooperation with attorney’s general) have either overturned voter approved laws or simply refused to defend state laws from attacks. Or a state was on the list because a challenge was in place and an outcome to the challenge was pending; as in the case of Oregon which has now “fallen” and had marriage redefined by a federal judge.
Daily Roundup: Texas Marriage Amendment Struck Down by Federal Judge
Posted on March 1, 2014 in Marriage, Public Policy by Nathan Cherry
In yet another shocking display of judicial activism, a judge has ignored 76 percent of the state’s voters and struck down a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Following a disturbing trend of judicial and attorney general decisions the federal judge, Orlando Garcia said the voter approved law has no standing in the lone-star state.
This trend of lawless behavior is not surprising when you have a president that does the same thing. Once President Obama decided he would not defend the laws of the United States and instructed his Department of Defense to ignore national law, it was only a matter of time before others did the same thing. Now, as a result of his reckless example we have attorney’s general taking the law into their own hands and making decisions outside their legal purview. As well we have judges ignoring the will of the people and striking laws that they don’t like, much like the Obama administration has done.
America truly is in a state of alarm as lawlessness and immorality are running rampant in an attempt to overwhelm the nation. If good people continue to ignore what is happening we can reasonably expect to lose many of our cherished freedoms in the coming years. Consider this your daily roundup of articles on the situation in Texas:
Government Gone Wild: Will West Virginia Be the Next State to Fall to Judicial Activism?
Posted on February 17, 2014 in Marriage, Public Policy by Nathan Cherry
I recently wrote about the trend of attorney’s general refusing to defend the laws of the states that elected them to defend their laws. I commented that this trend was accelerated by President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder refusing to defend DOMA. Once the president starts deciding which laws he will and will not defend it is just a matter of time before everyone else decides they can do it too.
Over the last year we’ve seen numerous attorney’s general decide not to defend state laws, while activist judges decide to strike down other laws. The latest in this trend comes from Kentucky where a judge said the state must recognize foreign gay marriages from other states. His declaration is in violation of Kentucky law, but that didn’t stop the judge from deciding to strike down the law and rewrite it according to his opinion. He reportedly ruled:
State Lawmakers MIA in Battle to Redefine Marriage in West Virginia
Posted on February 10, 2014 in Marriage by Nathan Cherry
Not surprisingly the battle to redefine marriage in West Virginia has been kept relatively quiet. Most people, I would venture, don’t even know there is a challenge to our state’s DOMA law currently pending in federal court. The ability to keep “we the people” out of the loop regarding these critical issues is a tactic liberals employ as often as possible.
Nonetheless the effort to redefine marriage for all Mountaineers is being waged by Lambda Legal, a LGBT rights organization, on behalf of three same-sex couples. A federal judge ruled last week that the lawsuit against West Virginia’s ban on homosexual “marriage” may proceed.
What If I Decided to Ignore the Law Like President Obama?
Posted on January 29, 2014 in Marriage, Public Policy by Nathan Cherry
A disturbing trend is taking place across the nation regarding marriage laws. We are seeing more frequently a refusal on the part of elected officials to defend marriage laws, even those put in place as a result of a vote of the people. Working from where we are right now, backwards, the troubling trend has a specific starting point.
Just last week the newly elected attorney general of Virginia said he would not uphold his state’s ban on same-sex “marriage.” Mark Herring said he “cannot and will not” defend a law that he believes is unconstitutional. Virginia’s ban on same-sex “marriage” is set to be challenged in court very soon by tow homosexual couples. So this decision by Herring is timely and will require legal scrambling on the part of the state.
Did You Hear Polygamy is Now Legal?
Posted on December 17, 2013 in Marriage by Nathan Cherry
Remember when defenders of traditional marriage said that any attempt to redefine marriage would result in opening the door to any kind “relationship” and calling it “marriage”? The argument said that if the government redefine marriage for homosexuals it will have to continue redefining marriage for other groups of be guilty of the same discrimination it now accuses traditional marriage supporters of.
That day came sooner than anyone expected.
The result is the legalization of polygamy in the wake of a decision by a federal judge in Utah that found the states laws banning polygamy unconstitutional.
Brietbart Senior Legal Analyst Ken Klukowski says that this decision relies on the very same arguments made by homosexuals:
Government Demands Christians Violate Religious Convictions
Posted on December 11, 2013 in Public Policy, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
In what can only be described as an appalling verdict, a federal judge has ordered a Colorado baker to violate his Christian convictions and serve cakes to homosexual couples.
Jack Phillips is the owner of Masterpiece Cake shop in Colorado. Last year a gay couple asked him to prepare a cake for them so they could celebrate their recent “marriage” in Massachusetts. Jack told the couple he could not serve them because doing so would violate his religious convictions. The couple, with the help of the ACLU, filed a discrimination lawsuit against Jack.
Now, a judge has told Jack that he must serve homosexuals or his business will face penalties.
Breaking: Federal Judge Declares Pastors Housing Allowance Unconstitutional
Posted on November 26, 2013 in Public Policy, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
It’s important to note that the federal judge issued a stay of her ruling until the appeals process plays out. So for now nothing will change and no pastor or church will be affected. However, the efforts to strip this protection for pastors and churches has continued with this latest ruling. Here’s why it’s important: