In a blistering rebuke of the Supreme Court decision to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act, Justice Antonin Scalia said the self-governing power of the people has been eroded.
"Today's opinion aggrandizes the power of the court to pronounce the law," Scalia wrote in the dissenting opinion. It will have the predictable consequence of diminishing the "power of our people to govern themselves," wrote Scalia, who was joined in his dissent by Justices Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice John Roberts, while Justice Samuel Alito wrote a separate dissenting opinion.
Scalia described the "assertion of judicial supremacy over the people’s representatives in Congress and the executive" as "jaw-dropping."
"It envisions a Supreme Court standing (or rather enthroned) at the apex of government, empowered to decide all constitutional questions, always and everywhere 'primary' in its role," said Scalia. "This image of the court would have been unrecognizable to those who wrote and ratified our national charter."
Scalia had particular disdain for fellow Justice Anthony Kennedy's ruling in the 5-4 case, saying it opened the door for a federal law allowing same-sex marriages.“It takes real cheek for today’s majority to assure us, as it is going out the door, that a constitutional requirement to give formal recognition to same-sex marriage is not at issue here — when what has preceded that assurance is a lecture on how superior the majority’s moral judgment in favor of same-sex marriage is to the Congress’s hateful moral judgment against it,” he wrote.
What the SCOTUS did with this decision is contrary to both of these basic libertarian tenets. In one stroke, the Court determined that government does have the right to determine the basic definition of marriage- which it does not- and, worse, has the right to overturn the accepted and acceptable definition of marriage as a covenant between one man and one woman before the eyes of the Lord. That is what marriage is, and no amount of legal torturing of the definition can change this basic fact.
Marriage is not a "convenience". It is not a "legal right". It is a commitment, one that should only ever be made with the most serious intent, and it is between one man, and one woman, consecrated before the Lord. That is all, and that is how it will remain no matter what the SCOTUS would like us to believe.