 |
McCain Panders To Radicals on Courts and Marriage |
 |
With last week’s historic decision by the California Supreme Court, California is set to join Massachusetts as the second state to recognize marriage equality for same-sex couples. John McCain is trotting out the same tired — but deeply radical — rhetoric used by the religious right to undermine the legitimacy of the courts, arguing that it is inappropriate for judges to make “these decisions“.Â
If we had a functioning media, it would quickly expose McCain’s position as the shameless pander that it is. McCain’s reaction reflects either ignorance or deliberate deception (I believe it is the latter).
The California court, in ruling that a ban on marriage by same-sex couples violates the state constitution, was doing what American courts have done for 200 years–deciding when a law is, or is not, constitutional. This principle, that courts uphold constitutional rights, has been accepted by such notorious judicial activists as William Rehnquist and Antonin Scalia.Â
One may certainly disagree with the California court’s, or any court’s, decision, but McCain attacks the very legitimacy of the courts to rule on the matter, to say what the constitution means. There is nothing maverick or moderate about this–McCain is marching in lockstep with the radical religious right, whose leaders argue that voters, not courts, should decide whether gay and lesbian people have constitutional rights.
The whole point of having a constitution that protects individual rights is that certain matters are not put to a popular vote. No one gets to vote up or down on free speech, equal protection of the laws, due process, and other guarantees provided by the federal Bill of Rights and state constitutions.Â
McCain seems to believe that controversial constitutional questions should be put to a vote. If that were the case, there would have been no Brown v. Board of Education, no Loving v. Virginia.
Everyone should learn in basic civics (if such a thing were taught) that the courts perform a crucial role in our constitutional democracy–they uphold constitutional rights even when it is unpopular to do so. When McCain and others undermine the legitimacy of our courts, they threaten our constitutional democracy.
Here is a basic question, and follow up, that the media ought to ask John McCain:
Do you believe that every constitutional question should be put to popular vote? If not, how do you decide which questions are to be decided by the courts and which by voters?
