I missed this earlier in the week (it’s been a busy one of supplementary jurisdiction, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and mens rea), but Judge Harvey Wilkinson had an eloquent op-ed in the Post Tuesday arguing against the Federal Marriage Amendment from the perspective of judicial restraint.
I have struggled to see the necessity of the FMA, and Wilkinson cinched it for me. FMA would do what conservatives have decried for years: constitutionalize what is rightly the province of state law.
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://spectatorworld.com/.
