This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the people of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.” Scalia, J., dissenting joined by Justice Thomas
“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 majority expressly disclaims judicial “caution” and omits even a pretense of humility, openly relying on its desire to remake society according to its own “new insights” into “the nature of injustice.”. . . Just who do we think we are?” Roberts, C. J., dissenting, joined by Justices Scalia and Thomas
The Same Sex Marriage ruling by the Supreme Court is highly controversial because of the manner it was made. It is legislation from the bench and not judicial. I sent my article to my Congressman, Steve Pearce and this is the correspondence to date.
The Sequence of Correspondence
1. I sent my Congressman, Steve Pearce, a copy of my Posting on the Supreme Court Ruling on marriage – OBERGEFELL v. HODGES, OHIO Department of Health Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Ruling Post 30 as can be seen here.
2. He replied to me with the attached letter.
3. I replied with the correspondence shown below.
The issue is constitutionally very significant because the Justices did not rule referring to the First Amendment – freedom to “exercise” religion. Rather, they ruled with respect to the 14th Amendment and stated that their view of the 14th Amendment – even if not stated in black letter law – was correct. They did say that those who felt strongly about their religion could “advocate” and “teach”. This is clearly “legislating from the bench”.
I have found that Congressman Steve Pearce is a very capable man who really tries to help his constituents with frequent communication and town halls. I have been on town halls with him where he had 12,000 people listening in and asking questions. He tries to listen and respond.
In my view, the Supreme Court is currently “out of control”. I believe that the Congress needs to address this issue aggressively. I asked three relevant questions – – – that may or may not be answered by Congressman Pearce. Time will tell. The questions are:
(1) What can Congress do about Justices that create law from the bench?
(2) Why does Congress allow this intrusion of the Supreme Court on and into their Constitutional Jurisdiction?
(3) Is it possible to “remove from the bench” or “impeach these jurists” that swore to uphold the Constitution but are actively trying to destroy it?
My Reply to Congressman Pearce’s Letter Reply
Thank you Congressman Pearce. Your reply clearly shows where your beliefs lie. (1) However, what can Congress do about Justices that create law from the bench? They swore to uphold the constitution but are blatantly attacking it. This is just the beginning. It began with John Robert’s changing Obamacare to a TAX rather than a health care law. It was extended by John Robert’s labeling state exchanges for all 50 states in the Obamacare law which endorsed and extended that monstrosity – – again legislation from the bench. Now we have a Marriage ruling that is further legislation from the bench. (2) Why does Congress allow this intrusion of the Supreme Court on and into their Constitutional Jurisdiction? (3) Is it possible to “remove from the bench” or “impeach these jurists” that swore to uphold the Constitution but are actively trying to destroy it?
I request a reply on these three questions. I will be circulating your reply to many members of the Las Cruces Community.
Congressman Pearce’s Letter to Me
——– Original Message ——–
Subject: A Message from Congressman Steve Pearce
From: “Congressman Steve Pearce” <NM02SPCRM@housemail.house.gov>
Date: Fri, July 24, 2015 2:51 pm
July 24, 2015
Dr. Joe Hawranek
8925 Bougainvillea Ct
Las Cruces, NM 88011-8348
Dear Dr. Hawranek:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, which addressed the issue of whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires a state to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
I was deeply disappointed in the Supreme Court’s activist decision which ignores the Constitution, the will of the people in the states, and our religious liberty. I respect every individual’s right to liberty. However, marriage has always been and will always be the union between one man and one woman. Moreover, every child deserves both a father and a mother.
We are a nation of laws, not of men, and not of arbitrary rule. Today’s ruling casts aside the Constitution, the voice of the people, longstanding precedent, and the natural law. The legal definition and regulation of marriage should continue to be left to the will of the people in the 50 states and their elected representatives.
I agree with the dissenting opinions in this case. Because of this decision, parents are now at greater risk. Justice Alito wrote, ‘I assume that those who cling to old beliefs . . . if they repeat those views in public . . . will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by . . . schools.’ Schools should not teach that parents are bigots for their belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.
The Supreme Court has also taken over the issue of marriage. Chief Justice Roberts wrote, ‘Five lawyers have closed the debate and enacted their own vision of marriage . . . ’ In 2013, judicial activism was similarly imposed in New Mexico, when five judges on the N.M. Supreme Court enacted their own vision of marriage into our state law.
I will continue to defend traditional marriage, the Free Exercise of Religion, and Free Speech. We must now protect the liberty of those who affirm marriage as a union between one man and one woman in keeping with the observance of their faith. For this reason, I am an original co-sponsor of H.R. 2802 – First Amendment Defense Act. This bill will ensure that the federal government cannot discriminate against those who exercise their freedom of speech and religion in upholding traditional marriage.
Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. I appreciate having the benefit of your views.
Member of Congress
P.S. For up-to-the-minute news and information, please visit http://pearce.house.gov. You can sign-up to receive e-newsletters, news releases, and updates on various issues important to Southern New Mexico. There, you can also visit my official pages on YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter.
Washington DC Office
2432 Rayburn HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
DC Phone:(202) 225-2365 (202) 225-2365
New Mexico Phone: (855) 4-PEARCE (473-2723)