The Chief Justice of the United States questioned the Constitutionality of the Court’s ruling in the same-sex marriage case.
Some refer to Chief Justice Roberts as “Chief Justice of the Supreme Court,” when this is done, it is incorrect and it limits the role of the Chief Justice of the United States. It is true Chief Justice Roberts presides over the Supreme Court; however he serves as the head of the Judicial Branch of the Federal Government. It is true; on the Supreme Court the Chief Justice’s vote carries no more influence than the Associate Justices. Therefore, in the same-sex marriage case his vote was with the minority and the ruling was passed five to four. Now let us look beyond the vote and read the dissenting opinion; his dissenting opinion must have merit if he is truly in fact the Chief Justice of the United States of America.
The Chief Justice of the United States concludes:
- The ruling of the Court had nothing to do with the Constitution.
- The ruling was an act of will and not the rule of law.
- Chief Justice Roberts expressed that the legitimacy of their (The Courts) power depends on confining it to the exercise of legal judgment.
Listen very carefully and let this ring in your ears: The legitimacy of the Supreme Court’s power depends on confining it to the exercise of legal judgment – The LEGITIMACY – The LEGITIMACY OF THEIR POWER DEPENDS ON CONFINING IT TO THE EXERCISE OF LEGAL JUDGMENT. – THIS RULING WAS AN ACT OF WILL AND NOT THE RULE OF LAW!
Again, the Chief Justice of the United States said that the Court ruling in the same-sex marriage case had nothing to do with the Constitution of the United States of America. Besides, The Chief Justice of the United States, The Late Justice Scalia, Justice Alito, and Justice Thomas all had concerns about the Court operating outside of its bounds.
In Justice Alito’s dissenting opinion, he stated “Today’s decision will also have a fundamental effect on this Court and its ability to uphold the rule of law. If a bare majority of Justices can invent a new right and impose that right on the rest of the country, the only real limit on what future majorities will be able to do is their own sense of what those with political power and cultural influence are willing to tolerate. Even enthusiastic supporters of same-sex marriage should worry about the scope of the power that today’s majority claims.” Justice Alito also declared: “Today’s decision shows that decades of attempts to restrain this Court’s abuse of its authority have failed.
However, The Late Justice Scalia claims that the Court engaged in constitutional revision by claiming power to grant “liberties” that the Constitution and its Amendments neglected to mention. The Late Justice Scalia claims that the Court had no basis for striking down a practice that is not expressly prohibited by the Fourteenth Amendments’ text, and that bears the endorsement of a long tradition of open, widespread, and unchallenged use dating back to the Amendment’s ratification.
The Late Justice Scalia claims that a system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy. Here is a quote from the late Justice Scalia: “Those civil consequences—and the public approval that conferring the name of marriage evidences—can perhaps have adverse social effects, but no more adverse than the effects of many other controversial laws. So it is not of special importance to me what the law says about marriage. It is of overwhelming importance, however, who it is that rules me. Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact— and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create “liberties” that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.”
Here is another quote from the Late Justice Scalia: “And to allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than on taxation without representation; no social transformation without representation.”
The People deserve a Judicial Branch that does not legislate from the bench, but respects the rule of law to bring about sound judgment. Although ruling was made regarding same-sex marriage, thus declaring DOMA and other States laws to be unconstitutional it did not resolve the problem because the Majority has attempted to impose social transformation without the representation of the people. Chief Justice Roberts declared that a cloud has been cast over same-sex marriage. Consequently, the Supreme Court of the United States of America is not commissioned to create and impose such transformation. The Late Justice Scalia, Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Thomas, and Justice Alito have done their part by offering their dissents. Now it is up to the People, the Legislative Branch and the President to do their part. The Law of the Land says that the Supreme Ruling is final, however in this case the ruling poses a very unique problem – The Chief Justice of the United States of America says the ruling had nothing to do with the Constitution and three Associate Justices are questioning the constitutionality of the judgment and indicates this act of creating reformation is not in the power of the Court. Therefore, this matter is still not resolved.
The concerns of the four Justices that they conveyed in their dissenting opinions are serious and should be answered before The Court resumes normal operations. Chief Justice Roberts expressed that the legitimacy of their power depends on confining it to the exercise of legal judgment. Based on the facts conveyed to the People by these dissentions – the Court went beyond legal judgment to bring forth transformation. Therefore, this ruling should be deemed illegitimate; this is a call for the People to come together and put the Court in check. For the People rule the Court – The Court Must Not Rule the People – The Court is Not Empowered to Make Law – The Courts Role is to interpret the laws based on the Constitution. The Chief Justice of the United States has declared that the Constitution had nothing to do with this ruling. In the 2015 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary, (this is an annual report that he is required to submit to Congress) he did not include this observation in the report. Therefore, this is a call for action for the People who love both God and Country because no action will be taken until the People with Christian influence put pressure on people with political power to take action.
Surely, the fitness of the Court is in question and there are grounds to shut it down until it is fit to uphold the Rule of Law according to the Constitution of the United States of America. I have prepared a report to the nation with recommendations.
The Supreme Court is an important part of the Justice Branch of Government, however if it fails to uphold the rule of law it is unfit to operate. The Chief Justice of the United States must work to ensure the fitness of the Court. Before we move to shut the Court down, I invite you to read the full report and watch the video. We have work to do; all three branches of government must be brought in check.
I submit this report to the nation because I love both God and Country. Let us take action now and restore God’s Institution of Marriage back to America. Moreover, let us demand the Supreme Court of the United of America does not exceed its power and is fit to uphold the rule of law. Each Justice must be reminded that they do not rule the People; however it is People that commissioned them to resolve legal disputes – upholding the rule of law. They need to know that they have failed. There must be a system established to ensure the fitness of the Court.
Submitted by:
Elmore Richmond Jr., President
Power Pack Center For Social And Economic Justice
