DC Tom Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Oh sorry, I didn't know she was elected. Thought it was some random county clerk So I will retract my argument and present another How is this any different than Virgina Attorney General Mark Herring. During his election he vowed to uphold Virginia's Marriage Amendment. Upon election he not only refused to enforce state law, he went so far as to file a brief in opposition of the law his office was bound to uphold Did a court order him to uphold the law? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Did a court order him to uphold the law? Who is going to file suit against the Attorney General's office? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Who is going to file suit against the Attorney General's office? The state legislature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinga Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 More updates: A Tennessee judge is refusing to grant a divorce between a man a woman. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/09/04/tenn-judge-refuses-to-grant-straight-couple-a-divorce-because-of-gay-marriage/ The judge's legal opinion is basically this: Tennessee previously had laws regarding marriage (between one man and one woman). These laws were rendered obsolete by the Supreme Court decision. With the Supreme Court decision, the Federal Government has now "set the law" regarding marriage and states can't have their own marriage laws. Tennessee currently has laws regarding divorce, but divorce laws vary from state to state. For example, in South Dakota, a marriage partner cannot be forced to grant a divorce from their other partner, even if the other partner has no interest in getting back together; while in California, a person can get a divorce in this matter. Since the Supreme Court has now "set the law" regarding marriage, the Federal Government now has to "set the law" regarding "what is not a marriage". And this judge makes a good point... In itself, the SCOTUS just made law since there is no current federal law defining marriage. However, there are state laws defining marriage, and the judge in the OP is actually bound by the laws of the state of KY which DOES define marriage. But don't make the mistake of this being all about state rights.... To a point it is, but the bigger issue will be the 1st.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts