SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Piffer Thread on Political Rantings and Ravings
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (12806)2/26/2004 10:16:09 PM
From: mph  Read Replies (2) of 14610
 
Not quite.

If the US Supreme Court holds that statutes
defining marriage as between a man and a woman
are unconstitutional, the Constitution would
have to be amended to get around it.

There is also a possibility of pursuing a
constitutional amendment in advance.

Since it is cumbersome to secure a
constitutional amendment (remember the ERA),
that is where the fight would ultimately lead,
and that is where public opinion comes into play.

You can cross check me with Smithee and OMD,
but I think that's right.

Con Law was eons ago<g>
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News