Yeah, you didn't see headlines like this coming out of these filthy rags when the Obergefell v. Hodges decision dropped, even though freakin' California had voted against gay marriage when it was put on the ballot.
Twice. The first initiative was overturned by activist judges. The second one had one of the state Supreme Court justices attempting to declare a constitutional amendment unconstitutional (under the state constitution). That guy was later vetted by Obama for the Supreme Court.
One presumes that, as far as politico are concerned, those are no longer "the public" and merely "deplorables" - I expect Politico is very disappointed they're still even allowed to vote...
Does Politico deliberately publish idiotic, politically ignorant tripe? The assumption that the SC should bend to "public opinion" is retarded.
They're not that consistent.
They think the SC should go against public opinion when public opinion is against them, and in favor of public opinion when it's in their favor.
It’s always the same childish logic with them.
Yeah, you didn't see headlines like this coming out of these filthy rags when the Obergefell v. Hodges decision dropped, even though freakin' California had voted against gay marriage when it was put on the ballot.
Twice. The first initiative was overturned by activist judges. The second one had one of the state Supreme Court justices attempting to declare a constitutional amendment unconstitutional (under the state constitution). That guy was later vetted by Obama for the Supreme Court.
It's also wrong. Unlimited abortion is not popular, and most people support allowing states to decide.
One presumes that, as far as politico are concerned, those are no longer "the public" and merely "deplorables" - I expect Politico is very disappointed they're still even allowed to vote...