WASHINGTON REACTIONS: Jim Geoly

[Jim Geoly is an attorney in Chicago.]

I thought that it was interesting that the court, like the one in Mass., decided the case under the state constitution only, precluding ultimate review by the U.S. Supreme Court. These people are building a very cynical federalism case against the federal DOMA: that the "states" should have the right to decide the issue. They will point to Quill/Glucksberg upholding the states' right to decide the physician assisted suicide issue. The irony is that, within each state, they are hijacking the democratic process and relying on activist judges to impose SSM under state constitutions that were never intended to guarantee this "right." They are overturning the will of the people of states like Mass. and WA, and then using that result disingenuously to argue that "the people" of Mass. or WA have opted for SSM, and should be allowed to do so. Very tricky stuff. Of course, in Quill/Glucksberg, the People of NY and WA really had spoken, through legislation banning assisted suicide. In Oregon, the People have made the opposite (and very unfortunate) decision.

Lawrence is leading to the bad results that were predicted, but in an unanticipated forum: state courts interpreting state constitutions. That is why a federal constitutional amendment is required: to protect the rights of the people of the several states to decide this issue democratically.

posted by Eve at 4:11 PM VOTE

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home