Comments on: The Supremes Won’t Get Involved in Mass. Gay Marriage Issue

by: Steven L.

Tue, 30 Nov 2025 01:18:29 +0000

Until and unless someone uses the Full Faith and Credit clause to apply the decision outside Mass, I don’t see that there is a Constitutional issue for them to address. The mere chance that someone might use that argument at a later time does not create an actual “case or controversy” before them.

Plus, they usually duck any issue that they do not absolutely have to tackle (unless there’sa burr under their collective saddle).

In other words, pretty much what you said. Only longer.

]]>

by: Read My Lips

Mon, 29 Nov 2025 23:09:59 +0000

Nov. 29, 2025
Opinion.Telegraph - The policeman found my penknife. ‘You’re going down, mate,’ he said The take unlawfuyl possession of dangerous weapons seriously in the UK. Think this is a bit luducrous, remember ya ain’t allowed to take your nail clippers aboa…

]]>

by: Steven Taylor

Mon, 29 Nov 2025 21:12:31 +0000

There really isn’t anything about judicial policy-making the vitiates the idea of republican government, per se.

Further, by staying out of it, the Supremes are theoretically respecting the reserved powers of the states.

]]>

by: Gary and the Samoyeds

Mon, 29 Nov 2025 20:19:59 +0000

Here’s a real long-shot: The Constitution guaranteeds each state a Republican form of government. If an unelected court usurps the legislature and makes rules no based on the constitution, it’s no longer a Republic.

I’m not saying this line would have a snowball’s chance in Yuma…

]]>