What the ‘judicial activists’ have in common

WHAT THE ‘JUDICIAL ACTIVISTS’ HAVE IN COMMON…. In recent years, four state Supreme Courts have ruled in support of same sex-marriage.

In Massachusetts, the ruling was written by Justice Margaret Marshall.

In California, the ruling was written by Justice Ronald George.

In Connecticut, the ruling was written by Justice Richard Palmer.

And in Iowa, the ruling was written by Justice Mark Cady.

And what do all four have in common? Each was appointed to their respective state Supreme Court by a Republican governor.

Given this, I suspect many far-right activists will interpret this as evidence that the Republican Party isn’t nearly right-wing enough. GOP governors must find more rigid ideologues for state judiciaries!

The fact that “equal protection” doesn’t mean what they think it means, and that even GOP-appointed judges can’t rationalize the legal position of anti-gay activists, continues to elude them.

In the not-too-distant future, Americans are going to look back at this era and wonder why on earth there was even a debate about allowing consenting adults to get married. It no doubt makes conservatives uncomfortable, but the right, historically, has consistently been on the wrong side of social justice issues of the day — equality for African Americans, equality for women, equality regardless of religious belief — and in every instance, their hostility for basic fairness looks absurd in hindsight.

The fight for marriage equality will, I suspect, be no different.