Jul 14, 2006

what a world, what a world

In Nebraska, Judicial activism falls flat again.
In the Nebraska case, U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon had ruled that the ban was too broad and deprived gays and lesbians of participation in the political process, among other things.

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed, saying in its ruling Friday that the amendment "and other laws limiting the state-recognized institution of marriage to heterosexual couples are rationally related to legitimate state interests and therefore do not violate the Constitution of the United States."
Legitimate state interests indeed. In the absence of any other empirical harms, we must assume that gay marriage is delaying the new theater on the west side of Olympia, and thus deserves legal prohibition because of its deleterious effect on revenue gathering. In a post-Kelo legal climate, we can expect more rulings along these lines.

What, you think my legal analysis stinks? It's okay. At least I'm not a senator.

No comments: