Originally created 06/02/06

A real constitutional crisis



The Georgia Supreme Court should be applauded for deciding to hear the marriage-defining constitutional amendment case quickly. They didn't have to do that, and we thank them.

Of course, the court could probably rule on it just as quickly:

It's the people's constitution, and the courts have no say in how the people write it. Period.

Next case.

About 75 percent of Georgia voters chose in November 2004 to define marriage in the state constitution as being between a man and a woman. Pretty straightforward, don't you think?

Well, then, you don't think like a judge!

A Fulton County Superior Court judge ruled that the amendment was unconstitutional because it covered two topics: marriage and civil unions.

What utter nonsense - as if voters didn't know what they were doing? How condescending and arrogant of the judge.

More importantly, how frightening when judges put themselves in the position of passing judgment on the people's right to amend their constitution as they see fit.

Politicians and reporters love to throw around the term "constitutional crisis" when there really isn't one.

But this is.

We appreciate the high court's indulgence in agreeing to expedite the appeal of the Fulton County judge's ruling, with a hearing for oral arguments on June 27. But we also hope the justices will be mindful of the courts' nonexistent role in writing our constitution for us.