Another day, another court order:
That brings about half of New Mexico's population living under marriage equality. I don't see how the NM Supreme Court can rule otherwise, when pending cases come before it. It seems, according to the, post, that in 1973 New Mexico law was revised to remove all references to gender in the state statutes, including the marriage laws.
As usual, there is huffing and puffing from the right, but it looks as though they don't have a leg to stand on.
Apparently, Sharer is unfamiliar with the concept of judicial review. Given that, based on the historical record, most legislators have no clue as to what's in the various constitutions, that seems like a necessary check. And equally apparently, Sharer doesn't know the laws in his state. It looks like the right-wing's only recourse is a constitutional amendment. Good luck with that.
New Mexico District Court Judge Alan M. Malott’s ruling today could not be more clear: Denying marriage equality rights to same sex couples is blatantly unconstitutional and unenforceable under New Mexico state law. He has ordered that marriage licenses be issued by the Bernalillo county clerk to couples regardless of gender, beginning immediately.
That brings about half of New Mexico's population living under marriage equality. I don't see how the NM Supreme Court can rule otherwise, when pending cases come before it. It seems, according to the, post, that in 1973 New Mexico law was revised to remove all references to gender in the state statutes, including the marriage laws.
As usual, there is huffing and puffing from the right, but it looks as though they don't have a leg to stand on.
"It is up the New Mexico State Legislature, with the consent of the Governor of New Mexico, to make laws and for county clerks and district court judges to abide by them. They do not make the laws. It is inexplicable how a district court just today discovered a new definition of marriage in our laws, when our marriage law has not been changed in over a century," [state Sen. Bill] Sharer said in a statement.
Apparently, Sharer is unfamiliar with the concept of judicial review. Given that, based on the historical record, most legislators have no clue as to what's in the various constitutions, that seems like a necessary check. And equally apparently, Sharer doesn't know the laws in his state. It looks like the right-wing's only recourse is a constitutional amendment. Good luck with that.
No comments:
Post a Comment