Blogging the Amendment

Offering a Forum to Discuss the Pros and Cons of the Marshall/Newman Amendment

Daily Press — Judicial Activism Argument “Deactivated”

Writing about the recent court decisions in New York and Georgia, this week the Daily Press echoed Coalition comments about the limited vitality of the “judicial activism” argument in VA:

That argument took a beating last week. Courts in two states – Georgia and New York – ruled that same-sex couples have no right to marry.

Now it’s probably easier to find a Frenchman happy about the World Cup outcome than it is to find an activist judge in Georgia. But New York, now there’s a different situation. You’d expect a state that would make Hillary Clinton a senator to have the kind of politics that would champion activist judges. Right? Yet New York’s highest court ruled that a state law defining marriage as between a man and a woman is constitutional.

The Daily Press goes on to label the proposed amendment, which it says is “hard to explain outside the context of prejudice against gays and lesbians,”  “utterly unnecessary,”  and “excessive,” and predicts how the future would judge its passage as public attitudes evolve:

So here’s a bet: If this amendment passes in November, one day, when it is stricken, people will wonder how on earth it was ever allowed to stain the Virginia Constitution.

My money’s on the same side as the Daily Press.


July 13, 2006 - Posted by | activist judges, politics of marriage


  1. I’m not sure exactly how I feel about the outcome of the cases. Of course I am disappointed that there are some Americans continue to believe same-sex marriage is wrong. It would have most definitely been great to have another ruling on the side of protecting the civil liberties of all Americans. If the outcome of the cases went the other way, however, social conservatives would have claimed that it was purely activist judges attempting to destroy marriage.

    I hate to admit it, but I believe that same-sex marriage will not begin being recognized by more moderate states until there is a vote that results in a victory for recognizing same-sex relationships. And I’m honestly hoping that victory comes in the defeat of the Marshall/Newman amendment. Yes, same-sex marriage would still be illegal in Virginia, but at least that would send the message that an amendment simply further hampers the civil liberties of a portion of Virginia’s residents.

    Comment by Ambivalent Mumblings | July 15, 2006 | Reply

  2. i love that chair too!

    Comment by rachael | January 18, 2007 | Reply

  3. Hi


    Comment by Test | March 30, 2007 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: