In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Obama declares law Unconstitutional!
Spider7115
Member Posts: 29,704 ✭✭✭
Passed into law by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton but Obama declares it "Unconstitutional". Anyone who doesn't believe Obama views himself as a monarch has their head up their butt. He has NO authority to declare any law unconstitutional just because he doesn't agree with it! [:(!]
WASHINGTON - In a major policy reversal, the Obama administration said Wednesday it will no longer defend the constitutionality of a federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriage.
Attorney General Eric Holder said President Barack Obama has concluded that the administration cannot defend the federal law that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman. He noted that the congressional debate during passage of the Defense of Marriage Act "contains numerous expressions reflecting moral disapproval of gays and lesbians and their intimate and family relationships - precisely the kind of stereotype-based thinking and animus" the Constitution is designed to guard against.
The Justice Department had defended the act in court until now.
The move quickly drew praise from some Democrats in Congress but a sharp response from the spokesman for Republican John Boehner, the House Speaker.
"While Americans want Washington to focus on creating jobs and cutting spending, the president will have to explain why he thinks now is the appropriate time to stir up a controversial issue that sharply divides the nation," said Boehner's spokesman Michael Steel.
WASHINGTON - In a major policy reversal, the Obama administration said Wednesday it will no longer defend the constitutionality of a federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriage.
Attorney General Eric Holder said President Barack Obama has concluded that the administration cannot defend the federal law that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman. He noted that the congressional debate during passage of the Defense of Marriage Act "contains numerous expressions reflecting moral disapproval of gays and lesbians and their intimate and family relationships - precisely the kind of stereotype-based thinking and animus" the Constitution is designed to guard against.
The Justice Department had defended the act in court until now.
The move quickly drew praise from some Democrats in Congress but a sharp response from the spokesman for Republican John Boehner, the House Speaker.
"While Americans want Washington to focus on creating jobs and cutting spending, the president will have to explain why he thinks now is the appropriate time to stir up a controversial issue that sharply divides the nation," said Boehner's spokesman Michael Steel.
Comments
I guess its OK for the Feds to stick their noses where they don't belong if its a "morality" law huh? It should not have even been considered by congress in the first place...
In my opinion,"same sex" relationships tear at the very fabric of our nation.
it's NOT "right" it's Deviate behavior.
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
,,
Wow, I thought BO was against gay mattiage. Didn't he say that during the campaign?? Don't tell me that Obama lied during the campaign just to get elected! Really?? Obama's a liar? Well I'll be dipped.
,,
I wonder how it squares with his Muslim faith?
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
I guess its OK for the Feds to stick their noses where they don't belong if its a "morality" law huh? It should not have even been considered by congress in the first place...
In my opinion,"same sex" relationships tear at the very fabric of our nation.
it's NOT "right" it's Deviate behavior.
You may be right that it's deviant. But it's victimless.
The only justifiable laws are the ones that keep people from harming the property or bodies of others. If the government ca outlaw things that are merely icky (i.e. "Deviate"), then pretty soon we've got the government meddling not just in our bedroom, but in our kitchen, our garden, and everywhere else.
quote:Originally posted by fishkiller41
quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
I guess its OK for the Feds to stick their noses where they don't belong if its a "morality" law huh? It should not have even been considered by congress in the first place...
In my opinion,"same sex" relationships tear at the very fabric of our nation.
it's NOT "right" it's Deviate behavior.
You may be right that it's deviant. But it's victimless.
The only justifiable laws are the ones that keep people from harming the property or bodies of others. If the government ca outlaw things that are merely icky (i.e. "Deviate"), then pretty soon we've got the government meddling not just in our bedroom, but in our kitchen, our garden, and everywhere else.
I'm calling BS on that!
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
quote:Originally posted by fishkiller41
quote:Originally posted by KSUmarksman
I guess its OK for the Feds to stick their noses where they don't belong if its a "morality" law huh? It should not have even been considered by congress in the first place...
In my opinion,"same sex" relationships tear at the very fabric of our nation.
it's NOT "right" it's Deviate behavior.
You may be right that it's deviant. But it's victimless.
The only justifiable laws are the ones that keep people from harming the property or bodies of others. If the government ca outlaw things that are merely icky (i.e. "Deviate"), then pretty soon we've got the government meddling not just in our bedroom, but in our kitchen, our garden, and everywhere else.
+1000
The point is that it's FEDERAL LAW and Obama is legally bound to obey and enforce the Laws of the United States. If a law is unconstitutional, it's the function of the Supreme Court to make that declaration and NOT the current POTUS! [:(!]
So what are we going to do with 9 un-employed Supreme Court judges? It's not his job to decide constitutionality! He, like the rest of us, is entitled to an opinion, but decisions of Constitutionality rest with the Supreme Court!
Thank you. Somebody gets it. [:)]
So what are we going to do with 9 un-employed Supreme Court judges? It's not his job to decide constitutionality! He, like the rest of us, is entitled to an opinion, but decisions of Constitutionality rest with the Supreme Court!
In that case the Oathkeepers cannot refuse to carry out (for example) an order to carry out a search and seize a man's weapons in violation of the Fourth and Second Amendments.
So what are we going to do with 9 un-employed Supreme Court judges? It's not his job to decide constitutionality! He, like the rest of us, is entitled to an opinion, but decisions of Constitutionality rest with the Supreme Court!
Of course the President doesn't have the final say over whether a law is constitutional or not. All he can do is base his administrative decisions on his opinion. Remember that G. W. Bush did much the same thing with signing statements he attached to legislation coming across his desk.
The solution is for someone who claims injury deriving from the Justice Department's failure to uphold DOMA to file suit and pursue the case to the Supreme Court.
quote:Originally posted by NeoBlackdog
So what are we going to do with 9 un-employed Supreme Court judges? It's not his job to decide constitutionality! He, like the rest of us, is entitled to an opinion, but decisions of Constitutionality rest with the Supreme Court!
Of course the President doesn't have the final say over whether a law is constitutional or not. All he can do is base his administrative decisions on his opinion. Remember that G. W. Bush did much the same thing with signing statements he attached to legislation coming across his desk.
The solution is for someone who claims injury deriving from the Justice Department's failure to uphold DOMA to file suit and pursue the case to the Supreme Court.
...or impeach Obama for dereliction of duty and abuse of power. [:(!]
The federal government has ZERO place in deciding what marriage is... I would argue not even states. It is up to the people and the churches.
The only reason it matters to the Feds is for income taxes.
In the case of states licence fees and divorce.
All riled up when the feds seede power back to the people... really!
Or is Facism really Okay.
Actually this is a win... NO WHERE in the constitution does it say manage marriage.
The federal government has ZERO place in deciding what marriage is... I would argue not even states. It is up to the people and the churches.
The only reason it matters to the Feds is for income taxes.
In the case of states licence fees and divorce.
All riled up when the feds seede power back to the people... really!
Or is Facism really Okay.
So you think it's perfectly OK for the POTUS to declare laws unconstitutional based on his personal beliefs? [:0]
quote:Originally posted by Mossbergboogie
Actually this is a win... NO WHERE in the constitution does it say manage marriage.
The federal government has ZERO place in deciding what marriage is... I would argue not even states. It is up to the people and the churches.
The only reason it matters to the Feds is for income taxes.
In the case of states licence fees and divorce.
All riled up when the feds seede power back to the people... really!
Or is Facism really Okay.
So you think it's perfectly OK for the POTUS to declare laws unconstitutional based on his personal beliefs? [:0]
I happens to be a correct personal opinoin of his. That is Fact.
So long as it seedes athourity I am okay with it.
If he starts declaring he can make up new laws I'll start to worry.
Jefferson did much the same for the alien and sedition acts.
quote:Originally posted by Spider7115
quote:Originally posted by Mossbergboogie
Actually this is a win... NO WHERE in the constitution does it say manage marriage.
The federal government has ZERO place in deciding what marriage is... I would argue not even states. It is up to the people and the churches.
The only reason it matters to the Feds is for income taxes.
In the case of states licence fees and divorce.
All riled up when the feds seede power back to the people... really!
Or is Facism really Okay.
So you think it's perfectly OK for the POTUS to declare laws unconstitutional based on his personal beliefs? [:0]
I happens to be a correct personal opinoin of his. That is Fact.
So long as it seedes athourity I am okay with it.
If he starts declaring he can make up new laws I'll start to worry.
It goes beyond opinion when he orders the Justice Department not to enforce the law.
quote:Originally posted by Mossbergboogie
quote:Originally posted by Spider7115
quote:Originally posted by Mossbergboogie
Actually this is a win... NO WHERE in the constitution does it say manage marriage.
The federal government has ZERO place in deciding what marriage is... I would argue not even states. It is up to the people and the churches.
The only reason it matters to the Feds is for income taxes.
In the case of states licence fees and divorce.
All riled up when the feds seede power back to the people... really!
Or is Facism really Okay.
So you think it's perfectly OK for the POTUS to declare laws unconstitutional based on his personal beliefs? [:0]
I happens to be a correct personal opinoin of his. That is Fact.
So long as it seedes athourity I am okay with it.
If he starts declaring he can make up new laws I'll start to worry.
It goes beyond opinion when he orders the Justice Department not to enforce the law.
So did Jefferson.. When he felt a law wasn't constitutional. What's your point?
quote:Originally posted by Mossbergboogie
quote:Originally posted by Spider7115
quote:Originally posted by Mossbergboogie
Actually this is a win... NO WHERE in the constitution does it say manage marriage.
The federal government has ZERO place in deciding what marriage is... I would argue not even states. It is up to the people and the churches.
The only reason it matters to the Feds is for income taxes.
In the case of states licence fees and divorce.
All riled up when the feds seede power back to the people... really!
Or is Facism really Okay.
So you think it's perfectly OK for the POTUS to declare laws unconstitutional based on his personal beliefs? [:0]
I happens to be a correct personal opinoin of his. That is Fact.
So long as it seedes athourity I am okay with it.
If he starts declaring he can make up new laws I'll start to worry.
It goes beyond opinion when he orders the Justice Department not to enforce the law.
I'm with you Spider.
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
Dear God, America is coming apart! On one hand we aren't enforcing existing law; on the other, we're making law up. All this while state legislators are running off to prevent legislation from being considered. We are no better off than the Libyans right now.
Some people are missing the point entirely. The context of the law is irrelevant! It could be about child abuse or gun rights or tax deductions or any federal law passed by Congress and signed by a previous POTUS.
The point is that it's FEDERAL LAW and Obama is legally bound to obey and enforce the Laws of the United States. If a law is unconstitutional, it's the function of the Supreme Court to make that declaration and NOT the current POTUS! [:(!]
About damn time someone speaks word for word the responsibilities and roll of our government. He has stepped way over the line.
Andrew Jackson (the first Democrat [;)]) was in open rebellion against the Supreme Court when he said "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it."
The Republic survived, but that doesn't make it right.
I don't agree with government involvement in marriage either, but I agree with that more than dismantling the separation of powers.
"The Obama administration says a federal law that bans recognition of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional and has directed the Justice Department not to defend the law anymore in court cases across the country."
From MSNBC web site:
"In a major reversal, the Obama administration has notified Congress that it will no longer defend the federal law that says marriage can exist only between a man and a woman.
Attorney General Eric Holder says he has recommended, and the president has agreed, that the law unconstitutionally discriminates against same-sex couples who are legally married but whose status is not recognized by the federal government."
I have noticed how Boener's spokesman put it and how other sites put it. If the law is wrong then the feds do not have to enforce it, the states can do what they want. And far as anything goes, why do we care?!? If they want to marry let them, let them be as miserable as everyone else.
And Obama is not Muslim.
The last I checked, marriage is NOT in the Constitution. Therefore, this is a rule reserved to the states.
quote:Originally posted by FWAddit
Obama's acting like an oathkeeper--refusing to enforce a law that would compromise his oath to uphold the Constitution.
I wonder how his islamic brothers feel about gay marriage?
This is just more misdirection. It is still a states issue.
you don't get a federal marriage license so how many states is he going to sue over this?
yeah this low life is just wagging the dog again. he see's his numbers going down in the polls so he wants to give the liberals something to praise him over but more importantly, he gives all the talking heads on the right a different topic to beat him up on rather than his obvious support for the "fundemental change" that he has inspired in the middle east.
I wonder how his islamic brothers feel about gay marriage?
This is just more misdirection. It is still a states issue.
you don't get a federal marriage license so how many states is he going to sue over this?
Probably none because the true stroy is they are no longer goind to defend litigation of section 3 of the DOMA.
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=503799
quote:Originally posted by NeoBlackdog
So what are we going to do with 9 un-employed Supreme Court judges? It's not his job to decide constitutionality! He, like the rest of us, is entitled to an opinion, but decisions of Constitutionality rest with the Supreme Court!
In that case the Oathkeepers cannot refuse to carry out (for example) an order to carry out a search and seize a man's weapons in violation of the Fourth and Second Amendments.
The 2nd and 4th are parts of the constitution which have both been upheld by the Supreme Court. Not a law that was added later.
quote:Originally posted by FWAddit
quote:Originally posted by NeoBlackdog
So what are we going to do with 9 un-employed Supreme Court judges? It's not his job to decide constitutionality! He, like the rest of us, is entitled to an opinion, but decisions of Constitutionality rest with the Supreme Court!
In that case the Oathkeepers cannot refuse to carry out (for example) an order to carry out a search and seize a man's weapons in violation of the Fourth and Second Amendments.
The 2nd and 4th are parts of the constitution which have both been upheld by the Supreme Court. Not a law that was added later.
What about the Patriot Act?
I suppose you are going to say the 9th and 10th amendments don't apply. In this case.
From NPR web site:
"The Obama administration says a federal law that bans recognition of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional and has directed the Justice Department not to defend the law anymore in court cases across the country."
From MSNBC web site:
"In a major reversal, the Obama administration has notified Congress that it will no longer defend the federal law that says marriage can exist only between a man and a woman.
Attorney General Eric Holder says he has recommended, and the president has agreed, that the law unconstitutionally discriminates against same-sex couples who are legally married but whose status is not recognized by the federal government."
I have noticed how Boener's spokesman put it and how other sites put it. If the law is wrong then the feds do not have to enforce it, the states can do what they want. And far as anything goes, why do we care?!? If they want to marry let them, let them be as miserable as everyone else.
And Obama is not Muslim.
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain