Rand and DOMA

[William R]

Wednesday Rand told ABC News that he agreed with Anthony Kennedy's majority opinion overturning California's Gay marriage law. Federalism was his rational. But this morning on her radio show Laura ingraham was blasting Rand for not understanding what Kennedy's opinion meant. It will end up destroying federalism because of the equal protection clause. It will be like Roe Wade all over again. Nationalizing marriage as an issue. States that have passed constitutional amendments that marriage is between man and wife will be overturned on the equal protection clause.

Rand keeps stepping on himself on issue that are going to bite him in the ass in 2016. He needs to get some better advisers. From immigration and now this, the base is going to reject Rand.

Kennedy’s DOMA Deception
Nationalized gay marriage is now inevitable.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/352256/kennedys-doma-deception-charles-krauthammer

[supermario21]

Laura should listen to Rand and not waste her time. The courts are the courts. This is really an almost entirely non-political issue at the federal level.

[Warlord]

The Federal courts cannot "overturn" a state constitution. That's absurd. It won't happen. If it does the states should just ignore it. There's nothing the Feds can do.

[Warlord]

Krauthammer is a moron by the way and perhaps not the person you should be listening to .

[heavenlyboy34]

The Federal courts cannot "overturn" a state constitution. That's absurd. It won't happen. If it does the states should just ignore it. There's nothing the Feds can do.
Well, they can threaten to stop funding state projects, infrastructure, etc. Thing about getting government money-it makes you the government's bitch till it's paid back.

[supermario21]

Well, they can threaten to stop funding state projects, infrastructure, etc. Thing about getting government money-it makes you the government's bitch till it's paid back.

Well, idk. The one good thing about the Obamacare decision is that this precedent may have been rolled back due to the forced Medicaid expansion being struck down on these grounds.

[Mr.NoSmile]

Krauthammer is a moron by the way and perhaps not the person you should be listening to .

He also called Paul's filibuster a stroke of political genius. What? A flub?

[William R]

The Federal courts cannot "overturn" a state constitution. That's absurd. It won't happen. If it does the states should just ignore it. There's nothing the Feds can do.

Of course they can!! Where have you been

[William R]

Laura should listen to Rand and not waste her time. The courts are the courts. This is really an almost entirely non-political issue at the federal level.

Laura clerked for Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court.

[William R]

Krauthammer is a moron by the way and perhaps not the person you should be listening to .

You have no reply. If South Carolina passed a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion it would be overturned by the high courts as already settled law.

[Warlord]

You have no reply. If South Carolina passed a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion it would be overturned by the high courts as already settled law.

Screw the courts and pass the amendment anyway? The states created the Federal government. Learn your history and make your state officials grow a pair of balls

[69360]

Wednesday Rand told ABC News that he agreed with Anthony Kennedy's majority opinion overturning California's Gay marriage law. Federalism was his rational. But this morning on her radio show Laura ingraham was blasting Rand for not understanding what Kennedy's opinion meant. It will end up destroying federalism because of the equal protection clause. It will be like Roe Wade all over again. Nationalizing marriage as an issue. States that have passed constitutional amendments that marriage is between man and wife will be overturned on the equal protection clause.

Rand keeps stepping on himself on issue that are going to bite him in the ass in 2016. He needs to get some better advisers. From immigration and now this, the base is going to reject Rand.

Kennedy’s DOMA Deception
Nationalized gay marriage is now inevitable.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/352256/kennedys-doma-deception-charles-krauthammer

The old traditional GOP base is shrinking, relying solely on the them is not going to work.


You have no reply. If South Carolina passed a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion it would be overturned by the high courts as already settled law.

Except it's not settled. The SC punted the real issue in roe with a ruling on 14th ammedment right to privacy and never addressed the lower courts 9th ammendment natural rights ruling.

The right case taken to the right SC could take down roe.

[Warlord]

Screw the SC. The 9 men in black do not have any say over the states and the people. Self-appointed hacks and arbiters of the constitution when it's the people and the states who have the final say. The constitution makes this abundantly clear.

[William R]

It's been settled law since 1973. Long before you were born I suspect.

I realize Rand it trying to appeal to Blue state people, but you don't win the Republican nomination by offending the base of your party. Rand is wrong on immigration and I don't think he really understands the Kennedy opinion on DOMA. It is very confusing. But Laura Ingrham who likes Rand and clerked for Clarence Thomas on the High Court all but said the Kennedy opinion nationalizes gay marriage. Rand will not get the GOP nomination if he keeps this up.

[Warlord]

It's been settled law since 1973. Long before you were born I suspect.

I realize Rand it trying to appeal to Blue state people, but you don't win the Republican nomination by offending the base of your party. Rand is wrong on immigration and I don't think he really understands the Kennedy opinion on DOMA. It is very confusing. But Laura Ingrham who likes Rand and clerked for Clarence Thomas on the High Court all but said the Kennedy opinion nationalizes gay marriage. Rand will not get the GOP nomination if he keeps this up.

Settled by who/what? Some self-appointed court from 1973? Who cares. They're irrelevant. All of them are self-appointed hacks. Scalia and Kennedy can go to hell. All of them can. Methinks Lady Ingraham has too much respect for the self-appointed institution of the Supreme Court.

[Brett85]

No, Rand said that he agreed with the DOMA decision, not the decision regarding California's gay marriage law.

[69360]

It's been settled law since 1973. Long before you were born I suspect.

I realize Rand it trying to appeal to Blue state people, but you don't win the Republican nomination by offending the base of your party. Rand is wrong on immigration and I don't think he really understands the Kennedy opinion on DOMA. It is very confusing. But Laura Ingrham who likes Rand and clerked for Clarence Thomas on the High Court all but said the Kennedy opinion nationalizes gay marriage. Rand will not get the GOP nomination if he keeps this up.


You suspect wrong about me and Rand is right on track to the nomination.

[muh_roads]

I think this is the only time I've ever agreed with Pelosi.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgjT24EQs0U

Who cares about this shit? This is all a distraction while the Syria war is going on.

[supermario21]

My only beef is how is this an issue? Even if it eventually nationalizes gay marriage, what can Rand or any other federal politician do about it? We're not getting a Federal constitutional amendment any time soon so what can be done other than advocate state bans? I like Laura a lot but this is an issue which is of no legislating/voting consequence for a federal candidate.

[PaleoPaul]

Screw the courts and pass the amendment anyway? The states created the Federal government. Learn your history and make your state officials grow a pair of balls
Ever hear of the Supremacy Clause? Federal law trumps state law.

[PaleoPaul]

My only beef is how is this an issue? Even if it eventually nationalizes gay marriage, what can Rand or any other federal politician do about it? We're not getting a Federal constitutional amendment any time soon so what can be done other than advocate state bans? I like Laura a lot but this is an issue which is of no legislating/voting consequence for a federal candidate.
Equality will be a national reality within the next decade. Expect a LOT more court battles within the near future.

With Section 3 of DOMA now dead and buried, there's going to be the issue of gay couples who got married in one state but live in another that doesn't recognize their union. That's going to be a court battle over full faith and credit.

I'm sure there'll be plaintiffs in states that ban gay marriages that will sue based on equal protection also.

Gays are going to get their Loving v. Virginia equivalent, like it or not.

[supermario21]

Equality will be a national reality within the next decade. Expect a LOT more court battles within the near future.

With Section 3 of DOMA now dead and buried, there's going to be the issue of gay couples who got married in one state but live in another that doesn't recognize their union. That's going to be a court battle over full faith and credit.

I'm sure there'll be plaintiffs in states that ban gay marriages that will sue based on equal protection also.

Gays are going to get their Loving v. Virginia equivalent, like it or not.


Yeah, JudgeNap predicted this a long time ago. I'd like to see polygamy legalized so maybe we get the government beast out of marriage.

[PaleoPaul]

Yeah, JudgeNap predicted this a long time ago. I'd like to see polygamy legalized so maybe we get the government beast out of marriage.
BUT WHO WILL BUILD THE ROADS?! ;)

[Christian Liberty]

Ever hear of the Supremacy Clause? Federal law trumps state law.

10th amendment trumps it...

[ThePenguinLibertarian]

The Federal courts cannot "overturn" a state constitution. That's absurd. It won't happen. If it does the states should just ignore it. There's nothing the Feds can do.
Sadly nobody cares about the constitution. Its all about feelings.

[PaleoPaul]

Sadly nobody cares about the constitution. Its all about feelings.
If a state amendment is unconstitutional according to the US Constitution, it's void.

There's no getting around that. It's so simple you don't even need a law degree to figure that one out. Junior high civics teaches you that one.