The House of Representative wastes more time on a hateful issue
Quote of note:
While Democrats called the bill unprecedented, backers said Congress had moved before to limit courts' authority on matters from cleaning up hazardous waste to protecting trees.
"If limiting the jurisdiction of the federal courts is good enough to protect trees, shouldn't it be good enough to protect a state's marriage policy?" Sensenbrenner said.
You sure you want to compare the E.P.A.'s protection of the environment to Constitutional protection of the rights of all citizenry? Especially the E.P.A. under G.W.B?
Trees are not citizens.
The House bill would prohibit federal courts, even the Supreme Court, from considering challenges to the 1996 U.S. Defense of Marriage Act, which empowered each state to decide on its own whether to allow same-sex marriage.
Opponents contend the bill would violate the equal protection clause by cutting off from federal judicial review a law affecting a specific minority.
House Votes to Curb Same-Sex Marriage
Thu Jul 22, 2004 09:21 PM ET
By Thomas Ferraro
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Republican-led U.S. House of Representatives approved a bill to curb same-sex marriage on Thursday after rejecting concerns the measure may be unconstitutional.
On a vote of 233-194, the House sent the proposal to the Senate where members of both parties said it will likely die. But it could help rev up an election-year issue.
Last week, on a related front, the Senate easily blocked a bid pushed by President Bush to amend the Constitution to define marriage as a union strictly between a man and a woman.
The House measure, also supported by the administration, offers a different approach. It would forbid federal judges from requiring one state to recognize a same-sex marriage licensed in another.
Democrats accused Bush and fellow Republicans of pushing the proposals merely to rally their conservative base for the November congressional and presidential contests.
"This debate is about a national election," Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, said in opposing the bill. "We are playing with fire with this bill, and that fire could destroy the nation we love."
"I rise in defense of the Constitution, in defense of the separation of powers," said House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat. "What's next? No judicial review of laws that restrict freedom of speech or religion?"
