Isn’t that the point of having judges elected?

Posted: August 27, 2010 by datechguy in culture, the courts
Tags: , , , ,

to make them accountable to the people?

Conservative activists are trying to oust three judges on the state Supreme Court whose unanimous ruling last year legalized same-sex unions. Their decision stunned opponents nationwide and delighted advocates who were eager for a victory in the heartland.

Why are supporters of Gay Marriage worried about this? It’s explained after the jump:

Gay rights groups have been less successful in the voting booth; in every state where the issue has been put on the ballot, voters have agreed to define marriage as exclusively between a man and a woman. emphasis mine

One can legitimately disagree on having elected vs appointed judges, both systems have advantages and disadvantages, but to get all in a huff because an elected official is being held accountable for actions in an elected office is just nonsense and highlights the disrespect and disdain the elites have with the voters in general and apparently our republican system in particular

Memeorandum thread here

Comments are closed.