A state lawmaker with expertise in
constitutional issues says there’s a strategy that would allow Congress to halt
the legalization of same-sex “marriage” by the U.S. Supreme Court in its
tracks.
The court’s 5-4 ruling Friday abolished all
state laws limiting marriage to one man and one woman.
But Virginia Delegate Robert G. Marshall
contends Congress “can immediately take action on a strategy to block the
Obama administration’s implementation of the court’s decision through the use
of riders to appropriations bills which will come before Congress this summer
and fall.”
“Suggested by James Madison, both liberals and
conservatives have successfully used this strategy to change public policy over
the past 50 years,” he wrote. “This approach is constitutional. It can be set
in motion within days, if not on the very day of a Supreme Court decision. …
And, if pursued by defenders of real marriage, this approach will require every
2016 congressional and presidential candidate to take a position on marriage.”
He said Congress can use its power of the purse,
if it chooses.
“Does Congress have this power? Yes! The
Constitution provides, that, ‘No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in
consequence of appropriations made by law …’ Art. 1, Sect. 9.”
It was James Madison, Marshall said, who
explained, “This power over the purse may, in fact, be regarded as the most
complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate
representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and
for carrying into effect every just and salutary measure.”
The report is by William J. Olson, who served in several
positions for the Reagan administration, and Herb Titus, a longtime
constitutional law professor. The law firm William J. Olson, P.C., has issued a
series of reports on the issue of marriage, funded by United States Justice Foundation.
Marshall explained that the strategy already has
been used to cut off American military aid and end the Vietnam War in 1975,
stop federal funding of abortion on demand through Medicaid with the Hyde
Amendment and halt a Jimmy Carter plan to demand predominantly Christian
schools prove they were not discriminating on the basis of race to keep their
tax-exempt status.
Marshall explained the use of the 14th
Amendment’s transformation from its original purpose of protecting black
Americans after the Civil War into “a mandate for same-sex ‘marriage.’”
“The decision must be challenged immediately and
effectively,” he said. “Many millions of Americans who voted to support and
adhere to the millennia old consensus on marriage must question the authority
and judgment of the court if it wrongly applies the Constitution, while
arrogantly charging that Americans who disagree with them are bigoted and
hateful.”
Amendments could prevent the removal of
tax-exempt status for any church or group that declines to participate in
same-sex marriage. They also could prevent requirements that federal
contractors accommodate same-sex marriage.
“An appropriations bill is much easier to pass
than a normal bill. Because funding bills are necessary to keep the government
open, they must be considered and passed yearly. Other bills can be buried in
committee, but appropriations bills cannot be ignored,” he explained.
He said the bottom line is this: “If our
Republican House of Representatives and our Republican Senate place an
appropriations rider on all spending bills stating ‘no funds appropriated
hereunder may be used to implement the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in
Obergefell,’ it would not undo or reverse a Supreme Court same-sex ‘marriage’
decision. However, it would make Obergefell a decision that was never enforced
at the federal level.”
Further, he said Congress could limit Supreme
Court justices to a single law clerk.
“If the justices have so much time on their hands
that they can attempt to defy the laws of Nature and Nature’s God, they may
become more circumspect in crusading for the liberal agenda,” he said.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/06/lawmaker-congress-can-halt-same-sex-marriage-in-tracks/#Svy6samVLWHL5b3U.99
Comments
The weapon of choice the Communists are using is the
notion that the US Constitution is a “living document” subject to
interpretation based on past court rulings (case law). Using these just
compounds the errors. The errors of the court are clear and need to be reversed
by the Congress. The words in the Constitution are clear and should be restored
to reflect their original meaning regardless of prior court errors.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody Ga Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment