I was just thinking about Chief Justice Roberts’ dissent of the SCOTUS marriage ruling. Particularly, I was considering his statements on the constitutionality of the majority opinion. Here are a few quotes from his dissent:
“The majority’s decision is an act of will, not legal judgment. The right it announces has no basis in the Constitution or this Court’s precedent.”
“The Constitution itself says nothing about marriage…”
“…as a judge, I find the majority’s position indefensible as a matter of constitutional law.”
“If you are among the many Americans — of whatever sexual orientation — who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today’s decision. Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it.”
The dissent of Chief Justice Roberts begs one question –
IF HE REALLY BELIEVES HIS OWN WORDS, THEN WHY IS HE GOING ALONG WITH HIS COLLEAGUES NOTION THAT THEY HAVE ENACTED LAW?!?!?!
A second question follows –
IF INDEED THE OPINION OF THE COURT IS NOT THE RULE OF LAW, THEN WHY DOESN’T THE CHIEF JUSTICE SIMPLY ENCOURAGE THE PEOPLE TO FOLLOW THE RULE OF LAW RATHER THAN THE OPINION OF THE COURT?!?!?!