Each time there is an election there appears dismal reports of voter turnout. How can we possibly expect to increase participation in the democratic process if the judiciary of the United States nullifies the bipartisan actions like the Defense of Marriage Act? How can we possibly expect to increase participation in the democratic process when a federal judge can nullify an amendment to a state constitution like Amendment 3? The judicial branch is sending the message that those who participate in the voting process do not matter.
A republican form of government is commonly called a democracy and includes the principle of the voice of the people through the ballot box. The judicial branch obviously does not follow the constitutional principle, which it swears to uphold. This is malfeasance.
It's ironic that the state of Utah, which was delayed approval for statehood and given the mandate from the federal government to implement "a man and a woman" marriage system, should see this principle turned around by the judiciary.
- Join the discussion: Is feminism misunderstood?
- Dan Liljenquist: The economic impact of...
- In our opinion: Timing is right for the...
- In our opinion: Federal contracting executive...
- My view: Utah's Constitution requires state...
- Perceptions of Obama and his policies at home...
- Capitalism and the common good: Fairness,...
- Can a news channel 'solve problems'?
- Lawrence and Windsor won't trump Utah... 114
- In our opinion: The Affordable Care Act... 79
- In our opinion: The long-term outlook... 51
- Can a news channel 'solve problems'? 47
- Join the discussion: Is feminism... 38
- Capitalism and the common good:... 37
- My view: A global warming solution to... 36
- In our opinion: Timing is right for the... 36