So Rep. Vicki Hartzler has her sensible, cotton granny-panties in a twist because a Jackson County Judge read the Constitution, then read the law that barred the state from recognizing same-sex marriages that were performed in other states and, per the Full Faith and Credit Clause and the Supremacy Clause, he found the law an unconstitutional violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection for all citizens.
“I am deeply disappointed that a judge has overturned the will of the Missouri people by striking down the state’s Constitutional amendment recognizing marriage as a union of one man and one woman. Missouri citizens overwhelmingly approved this amendment with 71 percent of our citizens supporting it. I look forward to this ruling being appealed to the United States Supreme Court and the right of Missouri citizens to make decisions regarding marriage policy being upheld.
Where to start?
First of all, I thank a God I’m not sure I believe in that she was elected to Congress, because this means the stupid bitch is no longer in a classroom mis-educating Missouri schoolchildren. There is your up-side to her election, I guess…that, and all the fun Charlie Pierce has had at her expense.
Second, we don’t let the majority decide on whether the minority gets equal RIGHTS. If they’re rights, they’re entitled to ’em. Case. Closed. No debate, no vote, no wait-a-secs, no caveats. No grey areas. All or nothing. In for a penny, in for a pound. Rights are rights are rights. Gay people don’t want to be treated in any special way…they want to be treated in an EQUAL way. A special right would be if they didn’t have to pay taxes. Like churches.
And third, she was in such a hurry to set her hair on fire that she got the facts wrong. Judge Youngs did not address the constitutional amendment that was part of Rove’s GOTV strategy for 2004 and enshrined that god-awful apostasy as part of our “kitchen sink” constitution, limiting his ruling to the law passed by a subsequent legislature out of pure meanness and spite, because they wanted to deny same-sex couples legally married in other states from accessing benefits such as health insurance, custody of minor children, inheritance rights, visitation rights in the hospital, end-of-life decisions…all those benefits that us straight folk take for granted but that my Uncles Billy and Richard had to form a corporation to get around over forty years ago, and that only addressed their finances.
Missouri must recognize the marriages of same-sex couples who have wed legally in other places, a state court judge ruled on Friday in the latest case to address gay rights in the United States.
Jackson County Circuit Judge J. Dale Youngs ruled that a state ban on recognition of legal same-sex marriages violated the rights of gay couples to the same protections heterosexual couples have under the U.S. Constitution.
Youngs did not address Missouri’s ban on same-sex marriage in the state, which was not part of the lawsuit brought by 10 married gay couples from Missouri.
It’s a malady common among republicans…overreach.
Of course, if she would break the binding on that pocket-Constitution she never leaves home without, she would see that the judge, being worthy of the title and his law degree, and having read the Constitution at least once – and, more importantly, having understood it – he ruled the only way he could.
You see, it’s a complex issue (most are, once you get past third grade) and the Constitution is a complex document. The Full Faith and Credit Clause (Article IV, Section I) of the Constitution reads:
Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.
So…it’s unconstitutional for a state to not recognize a marriage legally performed in another state. That’s black-letter law.
Now let’s have a look at the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
That’s pretty black-letter law, too.
And the cherry on top? The Supremacy Clause
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
As I’ve been saying since that first “A” on a Con-Law exam…L-1ed.