Defiance!

No, not the TV series (which I'm anxiously awaiting on Netflix), but leading Republicans reacting to the possibility of the Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality.

Some highlights (if we can call them that):

Rick Santorum:

“We’re not bound by what nine people say in perpetuity.”

"I think it's important to understand that the Supreme Court doesn't have the final word," Santorum told viewers. "It has its word. Its word has validity. But it's important for Congress and the president, frankly, to push back when the Supreme Court gets it wrong."

Given that Santorum is exhibiting his usual clarity of thought, it's hard to know how to address this. Yes, Congress, at least, has the ability to "push back." Congress has tried that twice on this issue, and failed both times. Until Congress does manage to do something, we are bound by what those nine people say.

Mike Huckabee:

“Presidents have understood that the Supreme Court cannot make a law, they cannot make it, the legislature has to make it, the executive branch has to sign it and enforce it,” Huckabee told Fox News’ Chris Wallace. “And the notion that the Supreme Court comes up with the ruling and that automatically subjects the two other branches to following it defies everything there is about the three equal branches of government.”

The Supreme Court can overturn a law, which is what it's being asked to do in this case. And the Supreme Court can indeed come up with a ruling that binds the other two branches, unless and until that ruling is overturned by some legal, constitutional means.

Ted Cruz:

“If the court tries to do this it will be rampant judicial activism. It will be lawlessness, it will be fundamentally illegitimate,” he said during an Iowa campaign stop earlier this spring.

Hmm -- the "judicial activism" mantra in overdrive. I still haven't figured out how a court ruling can be "lawless." It can be bad law, but it can't be lawless.

Cruz is really proving himself to be the wingnut's wingnut. And he's a serious contender for the Republican nomination.

Ben Carson:

"First of all, we have to understand how the Constitution works. The president is required to carry out the laws of the land, the laws of the land come from the legislative branch," Carson said in May. "So if the legislative branch creates a law or changes a law, the executive branch has a responsibly to carry it out. It doesn’t say they have the responsibility to carry out a judicial law. And that's something we need to talk about."

Ben Carson needs to figure out how the Constitution works. He seems to have missed the last couple hundred years of judicial history. A Supreme Court decision is the law of the land.

And of course, Judge Roy Moore:

"When federal courts start changing our Constitution by defining words that are not even there, like marriage, they're going to do the same thing with family in the future,” he later said, doubling down on his order. "When a word’s not in the Constitution, clearly the powers of the Supreme Court do not allow them to redefine words and seize power.”

Wow. Just "Wow!" This is a common thread through all the rhetoric of Anti-Gay, Inc., against marriage equality, and it's total bullshit. The Court is not redefining anything. The Court is addressing the applicability of the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the states' ability to abrogate the fundamental right of marriage for a class of citizens with no rational basis. Marriage will still be marriage.

I've skipped some -- Steve King, convicted felon Tom DeLay, Texas state rep Cecil Bell -- but I'm sure, if you care to take the time, you're more well-informed -- and more honest -- than they are: you can come up with your own comments.