Author Topic: Federal Court Ruling Renders State Laws & Constutions Unconstitional!  (Read 460 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jim Nunziato

The State Legislature of North Carolina approved a bill exempting judges and other civil service personnel from penalty for refusing to officiate and/or process applications for “same sex” marriages, if they find “same sex” marriages to be contrary to their church/religious beliefs.  The Governor of North Carolina vetoed the bill.  The State Legislature overruled the veto of the Governor of North Carolina, and the Bill became law.

There should have never been a need for this law in the first place.

On May 8, 2012, North Carolina voters approved North Carolina Amendment 1 to the North Carolina State Constitution. It read:  "Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State. This section does not prohibit a private party from entering into contracts with another private party; nor does this section prohibit courts from adjudicating the rights of private parties pursuant to such contracts."  The vote was 61.04% to 38.96%, with a voter turnout of 34.66%. State law already defined marriage as being between a man and a woman.  The people of the State of North Carolina had already spoken.

On July 28, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit affirmed a lower court ruling in Virginia in favor of the freedom to marry, declaring that banning same-sex couples from marriage is unconstitutional. The decision affirmed the February 13 ruling from U.S. District Court Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen in Bostic v. Schaefer, in which same-sex couples sought the freedom to marry, and respect for their marriages legally performed in other states. On October 6, the United States Supreme Court denied review of this case, meaning that same-sex couples would have the freedom to marry in Virginia. Since the 4th Circuit also covers Maryland, West Virginia, North and South Carolina, the decision by the Supreme Court to refuse review meant the 4th Circuit decision stood as case law in the other states. With the exception of Maryland, where same-sex marriage was already legal, court cases were promptly filed to strike down various state laws and amendments.

Shortly after 5 p.m. on Oct. 10, 2014, U.S. District Court Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr. in Asheville issued a ruling in the case of General Synod of the United Church of Christ, et al. v. Drew Reisinger, Register of Deeds of Buncombe County, declaring the amendment approved by state voters in 2012 "and any other source of state law that operates to deny same-sex couples the right to marry in the State of North Carolina or prohibits recognition of same-sex marriages lawfully solemnized in other States, Territories, or a District of the United States, or threatens clergy or other officiants who solemnize the union of same-sex couples with civil or criminal penalties" unconstitutional.

Since there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution protecting anyone's right to marry, nor granting Congress any power concerning marriage, and the 10th amendment clearly states:  "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." The fact that the U.S. court system involved itself in the first place is unconstitutional.  This is clearly a state issue, and in North Carolina's case, there was already an existing state law, and a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman.  The people of North Carolina had already spoken and decided for themselves how they wanted to treat same-sex marriage. Whatever happened to "Government of the people, by the people, for the people?"

It should have never become necessary, but because of U.S. federal courts overstepping their areas of jurisdiction, on May 28, 2015, NC Senate Bill 2 was ratified. This bill would have allowed magistrates and Clerks of Court to recuse  themselves from performing same-sex marriages because of conflicts with personal religious beliefs.  On May 28, Gov. Pat McCrory vetoed the bill, but his veto was over-ruled in the NC General Assembly, and it became law in spite of his veto.

This (state) bill was written in direct response to the U.S. (federal) court ruling which disregarded the 1st amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which deemed our state laws and state constitution to be "unconstitutional." It would allow those with the authority to perform marriages, the ability to refrain from performing same-sex marriages based on their own individual religious

The first amendment in the Bill of Rights says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The majority opinion of "We the People" who are in opposition of same-sex marriage are opposed to it based on religious beliefs.  The U.S. Federal judicial ruling establishes precedent which "prohibits the free exercise thereof" and therefore violates the 1st amendment. 
"I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend."  Thomas Jefferson

If Hillary was the answer, then it must have been a really stupid question!