The left gets pinned down on legislating from the bench

judgePro-lifers are frequently told to shut up about abortion because the US Supreme Court made it a matter of settled law in 1973.  Leftists giggled at social conservatives when a federal court slapped down North Carolina’s marriage amendment to its state constitution.  “It’s over, Bible-thumpers,” we were told.  

Currently, Alabama is fighting back against the federal judiciary’s efforts to bring gay marriage to the Yellowhammer State.  And THAT has the left and its allies in the drive-by media in a tizzy: 

I don’t know that I have ever seen this level of unforced error from anyone on television ever. In an interview with Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore over a federal district court’s order on gay marriage, CNN’s Chris Cuomo first asserted that a majority of people support gay marriage, as opposed to a plurality. I’m pretty sure he was just talking about Alabama, which makes it even worse.

Further, Chris Cuomo did not understand the nuances of the case. The probate courts in Alabama issue marriage license. The federal district court enjoined the Alabama Attorney General, who plays no role in issuing marriage licenses. And Chief Justice Moore, for all his faults, was right to point out that the federal court’s order did not apply to probate judges. Chris Cuomo did not understand, or did not want to understand that.

But the most damning part of the interview came with Chief Justice Moore asked Chris Cuomo if Cuomo would have adhered to Dred Scott, which treated black people as inferior to white people, or Plessy v. Ferguson, which established separate but equal as the law of the land.

Cuomo tried to get out of answering the question, but Chief Justice Moore demanded Cuomo answer it. It is safe to say, Cuomo would have enforced both Dred Scott and Plessy based on his answer, which was “You follow the law of the land. You follow the law of the land. That’s what our nation is based on.”

See for yourself and note that earlier in the interview Cuomo said our rights come from people, refuting the Declaration of Independence.

Dred Scott AND Plessy were both sparks that ignited the slavery abolition movement in America.  Leftists tell us these days that the federal courts’s decrees are the final say — “the law of the land.”   Imagine if they had been alive in the mid- to late-19th century when Scott and Plessy were handed down and had used that logic: ”Give it up with this silly abolition and civil rights thing.  The federal courts have spoken.  Blacks ARE the property of white people. Separate BUT equal accommodations for blacks and whites are perfectly fine. Deal with it! Move on!”

3 thoughts on “The left gets pinned down on legislating from the bench

  1. I heard the interview. It’s interesting how high handed these talking heads are and how quickly they admit that they will do as directed whether it’s right or wrong as long as some government entity orders it. According to law “following orders” is not a legal defense and yet most on both sides of the phony left / right paradigm will quickly defer to government as an all out justification. Just because a majority of a body of 535 +1 decide something should be a certain way doesn’t mean it’s right for 315+ million.

  2. Leftists aren’t logical creatures. They’re on the verge of being criminally insane. You’d get more logic from rabid animals.

    We know that Leftists despises the Constitution, because it’s a formidable obstacle for them. They only resort to it, when they think it serves their purpose.

    Leftists and conservatives want to live in two totally different societies. Clearly, there’s no way to “meet in the middle” with them.

    While I’m not a Paulite, I think Ron Paul is correct, when he said that secession is inevitable:

    Ron Paul: “Good News” That Secession Is Happening

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/ron-paul-good-news-that-secession-is-happening#.dc3v9V6LB

    (Yes, buzzfeed.)

    Let’s get on with it, then.

Comments are closed.