The Presidential candidate who demonstrates that he /she understands what words mean, what “law” means, and what the Constitution means, and indicates he intends to govern accordingly, will get my vote. Chris Christie doesn’t, and he won’t.
“I think for folks who are in the government world, they kind of have to do their job, whether you agree with the law or you don’t,” Christie told reporters following a town hall…….”
That remark was in reference to county clerks refusing to issue marriage licenses to homosexual couples. And in reference to the recent Supreme Court ruling that said homosexual couples have the right to marry. Christie specifically referenced “the law”, as do many of the apologists for same-sex marriage. But as we who can read and comprehend have come to understand, Supreme Court justices do not make law. Further, the federal government is not the issuing body for marriage licenses, or any other kind of license. States are. If there is a specific New Jersey law stipulating that certain individuals fall within the umbrella of those to whom licenses may be granted, so be it. Most states do not have those laws.
But even further, if the argument is pressed that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and the Supreme Court justices may rule on the application of that law to actions within the sovereign states, those “rights” they profess to uphold must fall within the penumbra of rights named as being within the bill of rights under the Constitution, if they are to be enforced by the federal government, and litigated by same. Homosexual marriage, or any other, is not.
Therefore, those rights may fall to the people or to the states in which they reside for enforcement, but the Supreme Court cannot make them up, either as law or amendment, and county clerks are well within their “rights” as citizens to assert that the Supreme Court cannot order them to do anything of the sort.
Oh, and by the way….county clerks can refuse to issue marriage licenses to 12-year-olds, too.