And if the DOMA is found to be unconstitutional by a Federal court, then it can be appealed to the supreme court and be settled there. Just because a law is very much liked by some people doesn't mean it's valid in light of the document that defines this very government. That IS for the courts to decide, and I don't find it to be "activist" when they rule a law to be in conflict with laws that supercede it.
If the way things are being run has actually, sincerely gotten out of hand, then
this is what you get.
Quote:
Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.
|