What to do when a Supreme Court ruling violates the Constitution?  This question should never have to be asked, because judges swear an oath to perform their duties “under the Constitution and laws of the United States, so help me God."  But what if a judge ignores the Constitution when ruling?  Let's examine this with respect to marriage.

What does the Constitution state on marriage?  A word search will confirm that “marriage” does not appear in the constitutional text.  Article I lists numerous powers granted to Congress.  Defining marriage is not among them.  Therefore, logical reading of the Constitution places that power at state level per the 10^th Amendment.

Amendment X. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Obviously some current judges are not logical in their judicial rulings.  The judges attempting to legalize homosexual marriage refer to the 14^th Amendment in their arguments.  This was ratified post-Civil War to stop Southern state governments from depriving black Americans of their constitutional rights.

AMENDMENT XIV.

Section 1. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 5. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

So activist judges are claiming in their recent ruling that states are violating a homosexual citizen's right to marry with state laws that define marriage as a man-woman union.  First, assuming that this is true, Amendment 14 clearly gives Congress the power to enforce the amendment with legislation.  The Courts have no power to enforce.

Second, is there really a constitutional right for two men or two women to marry?  Judicial logic of the recent homosexual marriage ruling claims that state laws restricting behavior violate a citizen's liberty.  But states do this all the time.  States require citizens to be a certain age to buy cigarettes and alcohol.  States make it illegal for felons to buy guns.  States make certain drugs like cocaine illegal. States define consensual sex as rape if the girl is too young.  States regulate marriage to prevent incest or sibling unions, and even require a certain age before allowing citizens to marry.  So if the 14^th Amendment prevents states from regulating marriage, it surely prevents them from regulating these other behaviors as well.  Absurd.  The Constitution's 14^th Amendment simply does not provide rights for any of these behaviors.

Article VI of the Constitution requires state governors and legislatures to swear an oath to uphold the Constitution as well.  Note support the Constitution – not rulings of judges, especially if those rulings violate the actual words of the Constitution.

What state will stand up for the Constitution by keeping its power to define and regulate marriage?

Scot Wolf is the author of The Bible and Constitution Made America Great By Providing Freedom and and Liberty to Citizens, available at Amazon.com. www.restorethefoundation.com