California Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ban. This will presumably create political headaches for liberals -- John McCain will be able to argue with some plausibility that judges appointed by Barack Obama are likely to make similar rulings (not that there's anything wrong with that, but the voters may feel otherwise) -- but it's a victory for justice.
The smart set thing to do at this point is, I assume, to argue that this is a good outcome but the process is bad. Realistically, though, the courts that rule in this direction are doing their jobs. I think there's good reason to think that America's system of very strong judicial review is a mistake and there should be some kind of override process (as in Canada) but judges are supposed to rule under the system we have.
UPDATE: Of course state court rulings can be overridden with amendments to the state constitution which, in California and most other places, isn't all that difficult. The problem arises at the federal level where it's preposterously difficult to pass a constitutional amendment.
| 
Heads in the Sand
There is an override process. It's called amending the constitution. Californians will decide if they want to override this decision in November.
Posted by Josh E. | May 15, 2008 2:07 PM