In the My View titled "Judiciary exists to cast judgment," Jan. 7, Carson Anderson argues that it is the job of judges to rule on unconstitutional laws and counteract acts of the Legislature. This is true.
Then Anderson compares Utah's marriage law to a hypothetical situation, pretending Utahns pass a law making all firearm ownership and use illegal. Anderson states correctly that it would be the judiciary's responsibility to strike down such a law. The problem with Anderson's argument is that there is a very clearly stated clause in the Constitution that specifically protects the citizens' right to bear arms. No such specific clause exists regarding gay marriage, and that is the problem here.
Where the judge has overstepped his authority is not in overturning a voter-approved law, but in using flawed logic to claim that the Constitution protects gay marriage, when it does not.
- 20 of the most influential and innovative...
- Carmen Rasmusen Herbert: Lessons learned from...
- Lois M. Collins: School start times are...
- Robert J. Samuelson: Do Democrats do it...
- School fees: Is Utah really family friendly?
- Richard Davis: The State Board can do better...
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Same-sex...
- Letter: Police brutality
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb:... 76
- Letter: Police brutality 56
- Whitt Flora: It's time to put U.S.... 35
- Robert J. Samuelson: Do Democrats do it... 27
- A. Scott Anderson: The world needs... 26
- Richard Davis: The State Board can do... 24
- Join the discussion: Is Rick Perry's... 23
- In our opinion: To be vigilant,... 23