Quantcast
Opinion

Letter: The 11th Amendment

Comments

Return To Article
  • homebrew South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 27, 2014 10:32 a.m.

    When shelby was appointed in 2011, Both of Utah's senators supported the nomination! Just a fact for you CONservatives to chew on!

  • Chilidog Somewhere, IL
    Jan. 27, 2014 6:01 a.m.

    Wow. For once I am impressed with the quality of the responses here. Yes, the 11th amendment is not applicable. And, I might add, the 14th amendment trumps the 10th in this case.

  • fmalad Malad, ID
    Jan. 25, 2014 4:31 p.m.

    I think U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby should be given a peace prize for upholding the constitution and putting a stop to bigotry!

  • fmalad Malad, ID
    Jan. 25, 2014 4:29 p.m.

    Cost our state dearly: No the last time we debated sex was justifying polygamy it almost prevented us from becoming a state!

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 6:42 p.m.

    @Open Minded Mormon

    The 14th amendment was wrongly applied.

    And it certainly doesn't override the 10th amendment. Defining Marriage was never right given to the federal government.

    Contrary to extreme left opinion States do rights and powers, in fact, ALL not delegated to the federal government.

    Federal government has no right being involved in marriage.

  • J Thompson SPRINGVILLE, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 5:26 p.m.

    RFLASH,

    How about reading the other Articles of Faith too. How about reading how we believe God the Father and in His Son and in the Holy Ghost? How about reading about personal transgressions? How about reading about keeping the commandments? How about trying to understand that Christ came to earth, not to save us in our sins, but to change, to leave those sins behind us so that he could save us from our sins?

    When we separate God from life, we get those who hunt for a single principle that they might think excuses them. Religion, when taken in its fulness, gets us past that self-centered view and allows us to understand the "wholeness" of Christ's doctrine and the requirements that His Doctrine places upon those who profess to follow Him.

    Removing God from our lives is to remove the very foundation of civilization. The commonality between religions is greater than the differences, but the philosophies of men wander all over creation.

  • nonceleb Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 1:37 p.m.

    Samuel leaves out the most important part of the 11th Amendment. It forbids the federal judiciary from involvement in suits against states brought by a citizen or citizens of another state or country. That is not the case here as the suit was brought by Utah citizens. Also, Shelby did not "make" a law. He ruled a current "law" (a state constitutional amendment) to be unconstitutional. That is the constitutional responsibility of the judiciary. If he had ruled in favor of the state you would not have heard complaints of "judicial tyranny" from opponents of marriage equality, but they would be heaping endless praise for the independent judiciary, separation of powers and checks and balances of our political system.

  • RFLASH Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 11:21 a.m.

    11. We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

    Is this true? Is it? Somebody explain to me why we are not being allowed to worship God according to our own conscience! Think about it! What does "all men" mean? Part of every man's quest for God is living a life of dignity! Mormons don't believe in the 11th article of faith! This is no game! we struggle to make lives better and you tell us that we are not allowed to believe in ourselves! How do we worship God if we do not believe in ourselves? We do! In our way, we worship our creator by caring enough about ourselves to do what is best for us! What are we to Mormons? It is clear that article 11 does not apply to us, so who do you really say we are? I will stand up to any of you who would degrade me to the point where you have no consideration of me as a man! Something is very wrong!

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Jan. 24, 2014 11:10 a.m.

    Mike Richards
    South Jordan, Utah

    When we uphold the Constitution, we must uphold ALL of the Constitution, not just the parts that we agree with.

    =====

    Sort of like ACA being passed by the House, the Senate, the President and upheld by SCOUTS -- but shutting down the government beause a minority in the GOP disagrees with it?

    or how about the 14th Amendment -- which Judge Shelby used to strike down Utah's Amendment 3.

    As you so said --
    When we uphold the Constitution, we must uphold ALL of the Constitution, not just the parts that we agree with.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Jan. 24, 2014 10:53 a.m.

    Amendment 3 was a clear shot of "All-or-Nothing"-ism.
    Which - got shot down. (ie.e, Nothing).

    I heard on KSL this morning that Governor Herbert NOW is interesed in a compromise of Civil Unions / Domestic Partnerships.
    [Which I have been advocating as a good and decent compromise for over 9 years now -- and been called all sorts of nasty names by my fellow Latter-Day Saints for it.]

    BTW - If you stick to the All-or-Nothing, you already know what the answer is going to be.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    Jan. 24, 2014 10:24 a.m.

    The 11th Amendment clearly has nothing to do with this case, as the plaintiffs in the suit were Utah citizens. Speaking only as an old law student, I think that's fairly obvious.

  • Spangs Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 10:05 a.m.

    As a sidenote: The "Obama appointee" Judge Robert J. Shelby's name was offered up by Republican senators Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee. They endorsed his nomination, with Sen. Lee describing Shelby as "pre-eminently qualified" and predicting that he would be "an outstanding judge." Senator Hatch also praised Shelby as "A man of keen intellect. Robert Shelby has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to the law".

    Judge Robert Shelby may have been appointed by President Obama, but I find the evidence slim that he is liberal shill.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Jan. 24, 2014 10:02 a.m.

    Thanks for the "stars", but you may want to take them away because I totally disagree with Judge Shelby's ruling. I think that he was irresponsible. I think that he twisted the Constitution. I think that he grasped for straws when none were even available; BUT, I agree with anyone who would say that the 11th Amendment cannot be used by a State to stop the Federal Government from bringing suit.

    When we uphold the Constitution, we must uphold ALL of the Constitution, not just the parts that we agree with. Whether a State should have the right to reject a suit brought by the Federal Government is moot because that prohibition is not part of the Constitution. If it is not part of the Constitution, then it is allowed. Our Constitution does not have a list of things that we CAN do. We can do anything unless we are specifically prohibited by law from doing those things. That means that the Federal Government can sue a State.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 9:46 a.m.

    Whatever the means by which we have arrived where we have, it's good to know Utah is leading the charge towards equal treatment for same sex marriage nation wide. The freedom and adherence to the law we so frequently speak of really means something.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 9:11 a.m.

    He IS defending it!

    Gov Herbert said very clearly that it's his responsibility to defend this law as long as it's part of our Constitution. I don't know what you are complaining about. He IS acting to defend the amendment made part of our constitution by the proposition-3 popular vote. What more can he do?

    He has to follow the legal process too. That's why we have Judges (to prevent Governors and Presidents, from doing whatever they want).

    ===

    You are from California... and lecturing the Governor of Utah for not defending/appealing the judge's ruling on proposition-3??

    It was the California AG and Governor deciding not to defend your prop-8 that got us here.

    This whole thing should have been resolved when the Supreme Court got the California prop-8 case... but they just decided not to decide, because the people suing didn't have standing and the people with standing (the California AG) decided not to defend it in court.

    California's Governor and AG didn't respond when the judge made his decision overriding the people. IF they had... the Supreme Court would have had to rule on it already!

  • Mike in Sandy Sandy, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 8:56 a.m.

    It might have cost the state" dearly" from a financial angle, but form a moral, correct, fair, just, inclusive and accepting standpoint, it has enriched the state.

  • Mike in Sandy Sandy, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 8:54 a.m.

    The judge's ruling was not 'flawed"--- It was constitutional, just, fair, and most of all, legal and correct.

  • Lane Myer Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 8:42 a.m.

    I did too, Ranch!

  • Ranch Here, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 8:27 a.m.

    @Mike R. Unbelieveable, I just gave you a +1. I'm living in the twilight zone.

  • ugottabkidn Sandy, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 8:10 a.m.

    Samuel Nielson, sorry but you'd better get used to it. It's going to happen in all 50 states and guess what? You won't notice a thing.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Jan. 24, 2014 7:22 a.m.

    I have to agree with atl134 on this. I cannot see how the 11th Amendment would could have been invoked.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 7:16 a.m.

    The writer gets points for creativity, but his understanding of the 11th Amendment has no basis in reality.

    The simple fact is that states may not, no matter how popular the sentiment within a state may be, enact laws that violate the United States Constitution.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 7:09 a.m.

    The US Constitution, according to Utah's own constitution, is the Supreme Law of the Land.

    You violate the US Constitution by passing laws violating the 14th Amendment, it is a Federal issue. You get sued in Federal court regardless of "state sovereignity".

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Jan. 24, 2014 7:02 a.m.

    "One man making laws for everyone is not a republican form of government; it is a dictatorship."

    ======

    Um, I think I see the problem.

    What "law" precisely did Judge Shelby make up?

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    Jan. 24, 2014 6:36 a.m.

    Irrespective of how you feel about Judge Shelby's ruling (and I am not a fan), states do not have the power to assert sovereign immunity from the federal govt. Were that so it would be done all the time and we would have a huge patchwork of state vs. federal law.

  • embarrassed Utahn! Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 5:29 a.m.

    And isn't it wonderful???! Bigotry and discrimination will soon be a thing of the past! Thank you Herbert.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 2:47 a.m.

    Your entire letter became outdated shortly after the Civil War began. I'm sorry, but states aren't small countries able to do whatever they want.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 24, 2014 12:51 a.m.

    11th Amendment
    "The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State."

    Translation, as it pertains to this case: a Californian or a Canadian couldn't sue in federal court over Amendment 3, it has to be a Utahn.