✔ 最佳答案
Presidents **ROUTINELY** file briefs with SCOTUS on pending cases
BUSH did that as well
I hope this was of use
At first I thought your question was about the Senate where a majority vote, as contemplated by the Constitution, means nothing due to Republican obstructionist filibustering.
As for your actual question, the majority can't define the rights of the minority.
You mean like the Republicans filibustering every single bill to prevent a majority vote from passing a bill in the Senate?
individual rights, according to Thomas jefferson, should not be subject to the whim and tyrrany of the majority.
Its constitutional stupid.
He lied about his feeling about gay marriage to get elected. But he calls it evolving
Or the latest whoop-de-doo with California attempting to overturn Prop 8.
I, myself, voted down a measure in my state that would have narrowed the definition of marriage, but the people of California spoke. For the bench to overturn their wishes is disgraceful.
Remember Obama's credo = "Anything to hurt America."
He's telling the Truth. -And the Truth "dictates" WHICH side of History the Matter is going to fall On, -NOT the President. So Time will Tell, the Courts will Decide, and ultimately- Gay Marriage will Prevail... :)
參考: Reality.
That is not being a dictator. He can say his opinions but that doesn't mean it will happen.
參考: Common Sense
Half of Hollywood is gay and he has to pay them back for all the money they poured into his campaign.
I do not think he should be pushing the Supreme Court to overturn a States Vote. I wonder who he will blackmail this time? His job is not to meddle in States affairs. He should be doing his job or at least act like it......
Yes, he is a wannabe dictator and he will make it so during these next 4 years.....Sad...
Just returning the favor.
yep, dems will follow beloved leader no matter what
Smash his face!!!
Rip out his guts
Put the boots to him
BTW, who is he?
Two problems with your argument:
-First, the majority of Americans support gay marriage.
-Second, even if they didn't, under a constitutional representative democracy like the USA, rights are not granted or revoked based on regional popular opinion. If they were, slavery would still be legal in the southern states.
In the USA, a "majority vote" has NEVER meant anything....pay attention, shizzle-for-brains!
The USA is a democratic REPUBLIC....you elect your Representatives by "popular vote", and then THEY have a legal obligation to vote as they see fit...
Did you miss that whole part about why your Founders did not want a Parliamentary system? I guess you must have!
You should be thoroughly ASHAMED, unless you were 'home-schooled', in which case your PARENTS should be ashamed!
參考: Good luck in the "real world", Einstein!
Wanna play the majority rules ?
Let's play
We''ll have all the states and territories that later became states that were on the Union side during Civil War refuse to recognize the validity of any marriage license that was issued by a state that was part of the Confederacy
Obama has every right to weigh in on the case. Anyone can file an amicus brief with the Supreme Court.
Even the state of California filed one.
Leave those poor people alone with their God.
