Tuesday, May 17, 2005
Those darned voters, amending their constitutions
Federal judge Joseph Bataillon threw out the amendment, saying it imposed 'significant burdens on both the expressive and intimate associational rights' of gay men and lesbians.
Instead of deferring to the voters' judgment on the nature of marriage, Bataillon chose to insult them. He wrote that the amendment 'goes so far beyond defining marriage that the court can only conclude that the intent and purpose of the amendment is based on animus against this class.'
Ah, yes, if that language sounds familiar to 'BreakPoint' listeners and readers, that’s because it’s straight out of Romer v. Evans. In that case, the Supreme Court overturned a Colorado amendment that prohibited extending anti-discrimination laws to cover sexual orientation. The majority, led by Justice Kennedy, concluded that the only possible reason people would approve such a measure was hatred of homosexuals."
Instead of deferring to the voters' judgment on the nature of marriage, Bataillon chose to insult them. He wrote that the amendment 'goes so far beyond defining marriage that the court can only conclude that the intent and purpose of the amendment is based on animus against this class.'
Ah, yes, if that language sounds familiar to 'BreakPoint' listeners and readers, that’s because it’s straight out of Romer v. Evans. In that case, the Supreme Court overturned a Colorado amendment that prohibited extending anti-discrimination laws to cover sexual orientation. The majority, led by Justice Kennedy, concluded that the only possible reason people would approve such a measure was hatred of homosexuals."
