More Supreme Court DRAMA

January 16, 2015 Special Alert: Supreme Court to Consider Future of Marriage The Supreme Court announced today it will hear cases dealing with state marriage amendments. Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan and Tennessee will get their day in court in April, with a decision to be handed down early next summer. At issue is the right of a state to define marriage in its constitution and decide whether to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. John Stemberger, president of the Florida Family Policy Council, filed a lawsuit in his state hoping to protect a marriage amendment there. He called the issue an “open question” until the Supreme Court rules. “It is very possible a five-vote-majority exists in favor of states’ rights,” he said, “and a decision of this nature would immediately reinvigorate the authority and enforceability of the Florida marriage amendment passed by just under five million voters. People should have the right to vote on defining marriage, and we are very hopeful the high court will uphold that right." Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst at Focus on the Family, looked back to a decision in which the high court ruled marriage was a state issue. “There are 30 states where voters approved constitutional amendments in order to keep the state courts out of the marriage redefining business,” he said. “However, that didn’t prevent federal courts from stepping in and trampling the will and wisdom of those citizens. “Once before, we watched the Supreme Court mandate a 50-state solution to a social issue in the abortion case of Roe v. Wade. That set off a cultural conflict that is still going strong, 42 years later. Even the liberal members of the Supreme Court today have criticized the Court back then for jumping into that issue that was working itself out at the state level. The question now is: Will those same justices learn from the mistakes of the past, or repeat them?” He said the Constitution is still in place, and the 14th Amendment hasn’t changed, just the opinions of some judges. “The bottom line on marriage is that no matter how much the courts interfere, they can’t really change the true definition of marriage, and they can’t change what is best for kids: a married mom and dad.”