Interesting
The recent court ruling in California, which overturned the state’s gay marriage ban1 cited the Heller case thusly:
Tradition alone, however, cannot form a rational basis
for a law. Williams v Illinois, 399 US 235, 239 (1970). The “ancient lineage” of a classification does not make it rational. Heller, 509 US at 327. Rather, the state must have an interest
apart from the fact of the tradition itself.
Cool.
- I agree with the court; banning gay marriage is wrong. [↩]
Completely agreed, the case citation is quite appropriate.
Just playing the devil’s advocate here- does an opinion on gay marriage then make it appropriate for the court to overturn what a clear majority of Californians voted for twice? First as a law, then as a state constitutional amendment, the will of the people is clear and the margins are wide.
Eric: I, for one, say it is appropriate.
It is not appropriate for the majority to deny the rights of a minority, no matter how overwhelming the majority vote.
Having such legal protections is part of what separates us from a frenzied mob rule.