Attorney general says state must follow 'rule of law,' but short on specifics | Arkansas Blog

Attorney general says state must follow 'rule of law,' but short on specifics


Attorney General Leslie Rutledge has signaled a general intention not to resist compliance with today's marriage equality ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, but her statement lacks specifics on immediate plans concerning the three pending legal cases and implementation of non-discriminatory practices in everything from taxation to issuance of birth certificates by government agencies.

Her full statement:

 Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge today released a statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. The Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have a right to marry in all 50 states.

“Although this decision does not reflect the will of Arkansas voters, we are a nation of laws, and the judicial system has an important role to play. I am disappointed that the justices have chosen to ignore the role of the States to define marriage. The justices have issued a decision, and that decision must be followed.

“We are continuing to review this landmark decision to make sure the full implications are understood and that implementation is consistent with the rule of law. I urge those seeking to marry to be respectful as the State seeks to follow this ruling. Moving forward, it is critically important that the rights of religious freedom be protected, and I am committed to doing so.”

Religion and "judicial tyranny" already have emerged as dog whistles for opponents in the aftermath of the ruling.

Jerry Cox of the Family Council, identified as a hate group for its anti-gay work, has decried judicial tyranny and issued a statement full of alarmist predictions that haven't come true in any of the states where same-se marriage has been legal for years. He suggested the ruling opened the door to polygamy, though the majority opinion had careful language that seemed to indicate the contrary. He also predicted a "tidal wave of litigation" forcing people to participate in same-sex marriages against their religious beliefs. The Supreme Court decision said quite plainly that religious freedom was preserved. Cox need look no farther than Iowa for an utter lack of negative fallout from court-ordered equality and rising approval among the populace, with an overwhelming majority saying they had been unaffectred, or positively affected, by same-sex marriage. The exception would be Supreme Court justices removed from office by religious extremists like Cox in the immediate aftermath of the historic ruling there.

American Family Radio has likened June 26 to 9/11. Really. That loving couples may marry and have families with privileges enjoyed by others is on a par with mass murder.

Comments (5)

Showing 1-5 of 5

Add a comment

Add a comment