From a reader, an interesting point:

“It’s nice that the President is speaking out in favor of defending marriage. However, so long as the Judiciary behaves in a manner unfettered by the actual text of the Constitution, this promises to be a Sisyphean task.

“Amendments are intended to change the Constitution, not undue de facto changes made by judicial fiat. All federal officers are sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. This includes defense against plainly unconstitutional judicial orders. Each judicial outrage cannot be met by rewriting the Constitution in hopes that the judges like the new language better than the old. If this becomes the standard then we are lost.

“How about the [president using the powers he already has] to fight the judges until the Judiciary gets the message and settles down? After all, it worked for FDR and his New Deal.”

Ramesh? This reader is on to something, isn’t he?