Levin weighs in on SCOTUS Prop 8 case

Tonight, Mark Levin thoroughly explained not only how the Supreme Court should rule on same-sex marriage, but more importantly why the Supreme Court has no business deciding this case in the first place...

Why do we reject our constitutional structure when some of the most difficult, controversial and political matters arise in this society? Why do we turn to five lawyers to make these decisions? Now, truth be told, many of us don't turn to those lawyers. But other people do, and they're hoping to impose their will on the entirety of society.

Mark goes on to question these notions of judicial review and why it's believed that five Justices are more likely to 'get it right' than states or other individuals...as well as clarifying the true (and only) meaning of the 14th Amendment in which these same-sex marriage arguments, among many others, misappropriate...

So let me suggest this to you with respect to the power of the courts, in particularly the Supreme Court. Where there's not a clear constitutional issue as there clearly was in Loving vs Virginia under the 14th amendment, a clear violation of the 14th amendment, then why should the federal courts intervene? Why should the Supreme Court intervene?

The Equal Protection Clause doesn’t say the ‘liberal promotion clause’ or the ‘radical egalitarianism clause’ where people can pour their economic, social and cultural agendas into the Constitution for the courts to decide. That’s not what that clause is there for and that’s not what it means.

‘So Mark, what should the court do?’

In my humble opinion, the court should strike down the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision, and through it, the district court’s decision in San Francisco. And the court should say:

‘We have no business in this case. The people of California voted, they passed Proposition 8 to amend their constitution. Maybe in ten years they’ll pass another proposition to reverse course. But there’s no federal constitutional violation here. This is not the same as segregation and racism. This is not a matter of equal protection.'

As Levin makes clear, this is not a fundamental, federal constitutional issue, but rather a 10th Amendment matter reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Related links: Justice Kennedy: ‘Serious Problem’ Supreme Court Deciding Too Many Issues That Can Be Decided By Congress
Michael McConnell: The Constitution and Same-Sex Marriage