A few words on Prop 8

Alright, it was a great victory, for gay and lesbian Americans, for civil protest / activism, and for social progress. So much has been said about the ruling, about the courage and determination (as well as meticulousness) of Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, and about how the ruling, with its harsh yet honest language, will send a tidal wave across the nation with regards to gay rights.

I have little to add to the discussion to the ruling itself. Suffice it to say that I echo the sentiments of Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow on their respective shows last night. This is about love, and the natural rights of people who are born in the United States. The 14th Amendment of the Constitution exists so that it can confront discrimination, not embrace it. The Constitution is what defines the United States and its people, not vice versa.

With that in mind, I have a few words to say about what this ruling might mean on the wider scale of American politics. In recent times, we have witnessed the balance of power between the three branches of government (Legislative, Executive, Judiciary) tilt heavily in favor of the Executive, where the President and his cabinet works, and many have raised the notion that the judicial branch, notably the United States Supreme Court, has become irrelevant. In this regard, what Judge Walker did was essentially make the Courts relevant again, by carefully studying and interpreting the Constitution and the Law, and rule that Prop 8 is unconstitutional.

In a rare instance, the Courts have dictated the political discussions, not the other way around.

Yes, I am clearly aware of the saying (some call it 'fact') that judicial courts traditionally are not supposed to interfere with politics. But it has become obvious that it is impossible for a judge to issue a ruling without looking at the consequences. Also, it almost always happens that when there is an 'activist' ruling by a 'liberal activist' judge, conservatives decry it claiming judicial activism. But Conservative activist judges do this just as often (look no further than the records of Justice Thomas and Justice Scalia). I think they should all face the reality of today's rapidly-changing society and call themselves activist judges.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost