| Zappykins said: "I mean, I'd give Obama a break if it wasn't for the fact that he specifically refused to appeal Prop 8 or 9 or whatever the homophobic California law was. He let that one go though. So why'd he fight against DADT being unconsitutional, but not the California Prop? No real reasoning comes to mind does it?"
Obama has no ability to do anything regarding Prop 8, even if he wanted to, he has, legally, no jurisdiction. Right now, it has been declare *unconstitutional twice* - and over years ago, but is still tied up in the courts. I know a gay couple that was together for 36+ years and others who would have liked to get married. The only ones that can do anything are same sex couples who would like to get married (who filed the lawsuit against it) and the people that sponsored the bill that took away civil rights in California (who are fighting in court to keep the marriage ban in place.) Currently, it is still tied up in the courts – and may make it’s way to the US Supreme Court – which is kinda scary – cause there are some nut jobs on there. (Remember Dred Scott.) |
It seems like your not familiar with the particular legislation hsitory of that law.
It was ruled unconsitutional then the white house declared "We believe it's unconstituional, and therefore we don't plan to appeal." The law is tied up in the courts only becaue other groups won the right to appeal when the federal government declines to appeal.
This is in comparison to DADT, which WAS appealed repeatidly. When asked why he appealed Obama said "I do have an obligation to make sure that I’m following some of the rules. I can’t simply ignore laws that are out there, I’ve got to work to make sure that they are changed."
He went from the span of a month or two of saying "I have to appeal every unconstituional law because it''s the law" to "I'm not going to defend it because it's unconsitutional."
