With marriage equality having arrived in all of Florida less than 24 hours ago, NOM is not happy (needless to say). Just as they called for it in Kansas, they are also calling on Florida to refuse to obey Judge Hinkle's order and the Constitution.
From their blog:
National Organization for Marriage Says Same-Sex Marriage in Florida Is Illegitimate, Calls On Florida Officials to Enforce State Law and Demands US Supreme Court to Reaffirm Right of States To Define Marriage As Union Of One Man And One Woman
I love how they see themselves as the self-appointed ultimate authority of what is and is not "legitimate". I would love to know where they got the idea that was they say carries any weight at all. They need to learn that the Supremacy Clause doesn't delegate the status of the highest law of the land to their blog.
The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today said that the imposition of same-sex 'marriage' in Florida is the result of an illegitimate act by a federal judge and demanded that the US Supreme Court grant review of a pending case from the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals and reaffirm that states have the right to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
"Illegitimate act"? Anytime a judge does something that you don't like, it's illegitimate. I'm sorry, but that's not how it works. Court actions do not cease to be legitimate and legally binding just because you don't like them. Judges can do this. And many have.
"It is simply illegitimate for the opinion of a federal district judge to trump the decision of millions of Floridians and attempt to redefine marriage in violation of Federal law," said Brian Brown, NOM's president. "Federal judges are acting as if the US Supreme Court has ordered same-sex marriage to be imposed, but in reality the Court has ruled that states have the right to define marriage. We demand that the US Supreme Court act immediately to review the pending marriage case before them and swiftly reaffirm that states have the right to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman."
No, Brian, you fucking idiot, it's not. You've had years to get this through your head (so I'm not optimistic that you will all of a sudden now). Unconstitutional laws are invalid, regardless of how many people voted for them. And Judge Hinkle is acting with the consent of both the 11th Circuit and the Supreme Court, both of whom have allowed his ruling to go into effect, notwithstanding the lack of a final 11th Circuit decision. That's pretty telling.
In Windsor v United States, a narrow majority of the US Supreme Court ruled that a federal law defining marriage violated the federal constitution because that law conflicted with the right of states to define marriage. In the particular case, the state of New York had acted to redefine marriage, making it genderless, putting the definition of marriage chosen by New York lawmakers at odds with the federal definition of marriage. This pro states-rights ruling in Windsor has since been twisted by many federal judges, using it to falsely claim that traditional marriage provisions adopted by states are unconstitutional.
Have they been twisting it, or has Justice Scalia been twisting it? He's the one who pointed out that the Court's
Windsor logic also extends to state marriage laws. Lower judges have just been following that advice.
"The US Supreme Court has never ruled that traditional marriage is unconstitutional," said Brown. "In fact, they have specifically ruled that states have the right to define marriage. It is a travesty of justice that states are allowing federal judges to single-handedly decide the laws of marriage. Florida officials should not go along with this illegitimate decree and should demand that state and local officials continue to enforce the marriage amendment that was overwhelmingly adopted by Florida voters in 2008.
And here's their utter disregard for the rule of law, as well as their hypocrisy. You always condemn what you believe to be lawlessness in favor of marriage equality. So when you start to
advocate lawlessness
against it, you don't have a whole lot of credibility.
Also, please don't call for them to do that, because if they do, I'll have to think of other nicknames for Rick Scott and Pam Bondi, just like for Gov. Brownshirt in Kansas. (Anyone got any ideas?)