Many self-described conservatives are claiming that Kentucky marriage clerk Kim Davis should either “follow the law” and issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples or “find another job” since, of course, the Obergefell opinion that there is a supposed Constitutional right to so-called “same-sex marriage” is now the “law of the land” (at least according to the Bush appointee federal judge who threw Kim Davis in jail for not agreeing to violate her oath and all the Judicial Supremacist blond bimbos and talking heads over at Faux News).
Jefferson, Hamilton, and Lincoln, however, would beg to differ (by their own words below) with the toxic liberal lie that Supreme Court (SC) opinions immediately and without exception “invalidate” Constitutionally enacted laws and statutes.
The Supreme Court is not king and their opinions are not the “law of the land” the very moment they are issued.
We have flouted the grave warnings of the likes of Thomas Jefferson, who wrote:
“To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. …The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots.”
Not even Hamilton imagined that the right to opine is a power to rule. Courts, he pointed out, have intentionally been given no means of enforcing their opinions — making it obvious that the executive and legislative branches are not compelled to “obey” false or even dubious opinions. Therefore, he wrote:
“…the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution. … [T]he judiciary … has no influence over either the sword or purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL…”
Lincoln acknowledged that court opinions are binding on the specific parties named and “entitled to very high respect and consideration (by) other departments of the government.” But like the Founding Fathers, he utterly rejected the claim that judges’ opinions are the law of the land:
“..if the policy of the government, upon vital questions, affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made, in ordinary litigation between parties, in personal actions, the people will have ceased, to be their own rulers, having, to that extent, practically resigned their government, into the hands of that eminent tribunal.”
Americans must reject the Orwellian Lie that is cancelling self-government in the United States. Lincoln said on the battlefield at Gettysburg:
“Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether … any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure… It is for us the living…to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us… we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
The Supreme Court issues administrative opinions that the other two superior branches (legislative and executive) should strongly consider. But any change in the laws must be made via the constitutionally proscribed process (by the legislative branch and signed into law by the executive.)
Judicial opinions are only legally binding on the parties in the case being heard insofar as they comply with the Constitution.
Any law or court opinion contrary to the Constitution is legally null and void on its face and must be ignored and rejected by every civil magistrate at every level and branch of government.
The problem is that many Americans have been brainwashed to believe the lie that COTUS and POTUS must always obey SCOTUS no matter how immoral, illegal and unconstitutional their opinions may be.
The truth is that COTUS and POTUS and every civil magistrate at every level and branch of government has a moral and Constitutional duty (per the oath they swear)to ignore/reject ALL anti-Constitutional court opinions. (Such as Obergefell for example)
The Supreme Court is no more “supreme” over the other 2 branches or the people than the Federal Reserve or Federal Express is part of the Federal Government. The Framers intentionally designed the Judiciary to be “the weakest of the 3 branches” for a reason. (See Federalist #78 for more).
The Democrat governor of Kentucky is blatantly violating his oath by allowing marriage licenses to be issued (and illegally altered) to same sex couples since the marriage statutes in Kentucky have never been altered or amended in any way and still limit marriage to one man and one woman.
And every single marriage license that has been issued to a same-sex couple in Kentucky is legally null and void.
He is the one who should be in jail. Not Kim Davis, who has a far superior understanding of the oath of office, the rule of law, our Constitutional Republican form of government and God’s Immutable Word than 99.9% of our elected representatives (including virtually every GOP presidential candidate).
All unconstitutional judicial opinions must be ignored and rejected by every civil magistrate at every level and branch of government. Period!
Roe should have been. Lawrence should have been. Dred Scott should have been. And Obergefell should be ignored and rejected by every governor of every sovereign state in the union for the immoral and unconstitutional abomination it is.
That is how our Representative Republican form of government was originally designed to work.
Ever hear of the term “checks and balances?”
Sadly, all 50 governors are violating their oaths by treating a toothless and totally immoral opinion as if it were the “law of the land” by issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples despite the fact the Supreme Court cannot make, amend or “overturn” laws and in spite of the fact that in virtually every state in the Union, the Constitutionally enacted marriage statutes still define marriage as the exclusive union of one man and one woman.
That includes the state of Kentucky where the marriage statute that limits marriage as the union of one man and one woman is still the “law of the land!”