It's not enough that four Massachusetts judges got to impose their definition of marriage upon 6.3 million people. The state's attorney general now wants to impose that almost universally disputed definition upon the entire country. "In enacting DOMA, Congress overstepped its authority, undermined states' efforts to recognize marriages between same-sex couples, and codified an animus towards gay and lesbian people," the Bay State's lawsuit against the federal government claims. DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act, merely decrees that states that don't recognize gay marriage don't have to recognize the homosexual unions performed by states that do recognize gay marriage. It doesn't prohibit Massachusetts from solemnizing unions repulsive to the people of Alabama. It only absolves Alabama from solemnizing unions its voters find repulsive. In other words, Alabama isn't forcing its morality upon Massachusetts; Massachusetts is forcing its morality upon Alabama.
This state is a f$%ing embarrassment and bad for America. The irony is not lost that Obama wants to use most of the failed states in the union, starting with California but with Massachusetts right behind, as a model for his national policies.
Wait, does Massachusetts even have standing?
I'm not sure what that means, but the Marxist in Chief has already alluded to the warped reality that using the Massachusetts state health system model would be a good start for a nationalized health care abomination.
Good Q, Alan. I doubt it. Don't you have to be able to prove damage of some sort?
Isn't the current court into demanding real standing before they decide big cases?
asdf: Not just anyone (not even any state government) can bring suit in federal court alleging that a law is unconstitutional.
In order to argue in federal court that x law is unconstitutional, the plaintiff (even if the plaintiff is a government entity) must show three things:
(1) The plaintiff must show an "injury in fact," which means the plaintiff must show that he/she/it is suffering, has suffered, or imminently will suffer, an invasion of some legally protected interest that he/she/it enjoys.
(2) The plaintiff must show that this injury in fact is fairly traceable to the defendant's conduct--the conduct that the plaintiff is challenging as unconstitutional (or otherwise violative of federal law).
(3) The plaintiff must show that this injury in fact is reasonably likely to be redressed if the plaintiff gets the relief that he/she/it is asking for in the suit.
I clicked the link and read the piece. As a law-school grad who's passed the bar, I'm embarrassed to admit that I can't really be sure whether Massachusetts has standing here. Is there anyone else here who has a better idea than I do?
xantippe: Careful there. Remember Massachusetts v. EPA? This Court isn't quite as strict about the standing doctrine as one might think. I don't know if this can be classified as a case where Massachusetts is suing as parens patriae. If the answer is yes, then that'll make it easier for Massachusetts to claim that it has standing to sue.
Maybe this (quoting from the article) will be enough for standing:
"The lawsuit also argues that the federal law requires the state to violate the constitutional rights of its citizens by treating married heterosexual couples and married same-sex couples differently when determining eligibility for Medicaid benefits and when determining whether the spouse of a veteran can be buried in a Massachusetts veterans' cemetery."
I don't know.
Thanks Alan. Now I get it. And I hope you're right. Much as with our Federal system, things are out of control here in Mass. The crazy's are surely running the asylum.
Hi, I used to use only
9EGnUf pytuwdedhnvf, [url=http://aoxgujhlrmwm.com/]aoxgujhlrmwm[/url], [link=http://niyevpizmkie.com/]niyevpizmkie[/link], http://rvvwhfprhewi.com/
ed2SZx
Again Mass is out over its ski's and has no idea what its doing.
I will say 3 things for Mass It has some of the
1) Lowest divorce rates in the nation
2) Lowest gun ownership
3) Highest % of residents with a bachelors degree.
These are good things. Severe left hippie's imparting their will upon others is not a good thing and Mass needs to stop. It could be worse we could be in Minn with Jesse the Body and now Senator Weird Al.
Daniel put a spell check on this sucker would ya.
