Judicial Activism

By Staff

j

June 24, 2020

Please follow and like us:

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling that expanded the definition of sex to include sexual orientation and gender identity is without a basis in history or law. Justice Alito dissented and said that the legislature should change the law, not the courts. We have three branches of government and the function of the judiciary is not to legislate, but rather to apply the law to a given set of facts. The problem with the court’s ruling that considers sexual orientation a civil right protected by law is that it jeopardizes those with a conservative view on marriage and human sexuality to potentially be charged with workplace harassment for holding conventional opinions about marriage and human biology. This ruling isn’t the last word but opens the door to more conflict on the matter.

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Happy Thanksgiving!

In 1621, the pilgrims celebrated the first Thanksgiving and thanked God for bringing them through...

Count Your Blessings

Millions of Americans will be traveling this Thanksgiving but imagine making a long, uncomfortable...

Commonwealth Policy Center