Michigan marriage amendment co-author comments on 9th Circuit ruling on California amendment

CONTACT: Gary Glenn, AFA-Michigan 989-835-7978

MIDLAND, Mich. — Gary Glenn, president for twelve years of the American Family Association of Michigan, and Ave Maria Law School Professor Patrick Gillen co-authored the Marriage Protection Amendment to Michigan’s state constitution that was approved by 59 percent of voters on a statewide ballot in 2004.  Glenn commented Tuesday on the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that California’s comparable amendment is unconstitutional:

The ruling by the most overturned, left-wing appeals court in America was boringly predictable. Arrogant as it is, it no longer carries any shock value that two activist elitist federal judges presumed themselves more intelligent and enlightened than the millions of California voters who voted to constitutionally protect one-man, one-woman marriage from being radically redefined.

Still, it’s just a pit stop on the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Once there, not only California’s but Michigan’s and twenty-eight other states’ Marriage Protection Amendments will be on the line, all approved by voters with an average 68 percent voting in favor.

Hopefully, Justice Scalia will be proven wrong when he predicted in Lawrence v. Texas a decade ago that the Supreme Court was laying the groundwork to declare a Constitutional “right” to so-called homosexual “marriage” in all 50 states, followed by polygamy and whatever follows that once the definition of marriage is opened up to the demands of the latest special interest group’s public pressure tactics.  Hopefully, at least five members of the U.S. Supreme Court will show more judicial restraint and more respect for the overwhelming will of the people evidenced in statewide ballot votes in Michigan and California and 28 other states.

The only certain way to protect and preserve one-man, one-woman marriage anywhere in America will be for Congress to use its Constitutional authority to declare that federal judges no longer have jurisdiction to rule on issues involving the definition of marriage, or for Congress and 37 state legislatures to approve a Marriage Protection Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

# # #

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.