The Supreme Court’s overreach in its Obergefell decision on same-sex marriage is astounding. That’s not just my opinion, just look at the dissenting justices who voiced their own urgent concerns.
Chief Justice John Roberts accused the majority of “judicial policymaking” that endangers our democratic form of government. “The majority,” he made clear, “lays out a tantalizing vision for the future for Members of this Court. If an unvarying social institution enduring over all of recorded history cannot inhibit judicial policymaking, what can?”
Justice Antonin Scalia offered a similarly stinging rebuke to the majority. “This is a naked judicial claim to legislative—indeed super-legislative—power; a claim fundamentally at odds with our system of government,” he stated. Then he offered these stunning words of judgment: “A system of government that makes the people subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy.”
Again: the grave concern did not come first from pundits and commentators and public intellectuals. It came from the sitting justices on the nation’s highest court.[soundcloud url=”https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/214155205″ params=”color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false” width=”100%” height=”166″ iframe=”true” /]