|
| “
|
In Iowa, Voters Oust Judges Over Marriage
Issue
DES
MOINES — In a rebuke of the state supreme court with
implications for judicial elections across the country, voters here
removed three justices who participated in a ruling last year that made
the state the first in the Midwest to permit same-sex marriage. ...
|
” |
I don't
care what the issue is, judges who legislate from the bench deserve have to be
removed. There's a bit of a conundrum however. How do these
same voters explain
Tom
Harkin
?
|
|
only wish we could do likewise with the supreme court
ReplyDeleteTo 'kinda' paraphase the first wookie, I'm finally proud to say I'm from Iowa. There is hope!
ReplyDeleteTim
"Legislating from the bench" is an easy charge to make. Any decision can be so named. It doesn't require any evidence. The choir will believe.
ReplyDeleteOpen that door, and liberals will be making the same accusation at every turn. That's not a good thing when we have the facts on our side. It takes judicial decisions from the realm of fact to the realm of politics.
Funny, Glenn Reynolds of Insatpundit says he is in favor of gay marriage, but if you can't get the state legislature to make it legal then it is wrong to do it by judicial fiat. After all I would like dueling to be legal again and the old Texas excuse "He needed killin" to be back in effect.
ReplyDeleteGlenn Reynolds is citing Constitution 101, and Common Sense 100.
ReplyDeletetoadold:
ReplyDeleteIn addition, I was once told that it was a defence against homicide charges in the Great State of Arizona that if a person caughttheir spouse "in flagrante delicto" with their lover that as long as the injured spouse killed BOTH of them there would be no charges.
Supposedly that was written into state law.
Yep--smart people, them 'zonans.
Hairy Nosed Wombat
An Iowan here who voted no on all three. Harkin? Can't explain it. I did have a chance to boo him in a parade once.
ReplyDelete