Close

The one and only.

Text

Do I understand the alternative amendment some endorse (which does not define marriage) to basically say that the states shall have the right to define marriage without interference from the courts? The states already possess such power under the 10th amendment, since none of the Constitution’s enumerated powers authorize any part of the federal government, including the federal courts, to intervene in such state decisions. I’m not familiar with the proposed wording, but is it any better than that which was ratified in 1791? The 10th amendment seems quite clear, and yet it’s widely ignored. I’m not sure an amendment that seeks, in essence, to underscore the 10th amendment would accomplish that which is intended. In any event, based on today’s vote, this sadly seems academic.

Text