Ted Cruz Throws Out Empty Cathphrases

For more than a decade I’ve been pointing out that the term “judicial activism” is a meaningless catchphrase used whenever someone disagrees with a court ruling. Ted Cruz proves me right by using it to describe the Supreme Court’s lack of action in the state marriage equality cases.

“The Supreme Court’s decision to let rulings by lower court judges stand that redefine marriage is both tragic and indefensible,” said Sen. Cruz. “By refusing to rule if the States can define marriage, the Supreme Court is abdicating its duty to uphold the Constitution. The fact that the Supreme Court Justices, without providing any explanation whatsoever, have permitted lower courts to strike down so many state marriage laws is astonishing.

“This is judicial activism at its worst. The Constitution entrusts state legislatures, elected by the People, to define marriage consistent with the values and mores of their citizens. Unelected judges should not be imposing their policy preferences to subvert the considered judgments of democratically elected legislatures.

So let me see if I have this straight. It’s “judicial activism” when the court takes no action at all? And it’s “astonishing” that the Supreme Court didn’t provide an explanation for why they didn’t grant cert when, in fact, they never explain why they deny a petition? And it’s totally wrong “unelected judges” to overturn the “considered judgments of democratically elected legislatures” — except, of course, when it comes to the Voting Rights Act, the Affordable Care Act, the McCain-Feingold law and any other law Cruz dislikes. Got that?

“The Supreme Court is, de facto, applying an extremely broad interpretation to the 14th Amendment without saying a word – an action that is likely to have far-reaching consequences. Because of the Court’s decision today, 11 States will likely now be forced to legalize same-sex marriage: Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Utah, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, Kansas, Colorado, and Wyoming. And this action paves the way for laws prohibiting same-sex marriage to be overturned in any state.

“It is beyond dispute that when the 14th Amendment was adopted 146 years ago, as a necessary post-Civil War era reform, it was not imagined to also mandate same-sex marriage, but that is what the Supreme Court is implying today. The Court is making the preposterous assumption that the People of the United States somehow silently redefined marriage in 1868 when they ratified the 14th Amendment.

“Nothing in the text, logic, structure, or original understanding of the 14th Amendment or any other constitutional provision authorizes judges to redefine marriage for the Nation. It is for the elected representatives of the People to make the laws of marriage, acting on the basis of their own constitutional authority, and protecting it, if necessary, from usurpation by the courts.

“Marriage is a question for the States.”

Every single thing in those few paragraphs applies equally well to state laws banning interracial marriage. The 14th Amendment was sold to the public because the framers of that amendment explicitly said that it would not overturn laws against interracial marriage. And if it’s a question for the states, it must be tyranny for the Supreme Court to have struck down such laws on equal protection grounds in 1967, right? But of course, Cruz would never admit that because he knows that’s wildly unpopular. Because he isn’t making a serious argument, he’s engaged in special pleading, applying his own reasoning only when it leads to the results he favors and ignoring it when it doesn’t.

"More Hannity boycotts hated so much by the deplorable base? Say it ain't so!Won't somebody ..."

Hannity Shows the Usual Right Wing ..."
"Happened to me! After I rode my bike through her flowerbed!"

Pastor: Accusations Against Moore Part of ..."
"Oh, yeah, that's a case of aliens blending in real inconspicuous-like.The really weird bit is ..."

OH Gov. Candidate Defends Franken by ..."
"Whataboutism is the refuge of those with no values. There are values that some people ..."

Pastor: Accusations Against Moore Part of ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • colnago80

    Cruz has also promised to introduce a constitutional amendment to prevent the courts from overturning laws against same sex marriage. Since such an amendment has less chance of being enacted then the Deadskins have of winning the Super Bowl this season, this is nothing but demagogic pandering to the teabaggers. As I have said many times previously, Cruz is the most dangerous man in the Rethuglican Party because of his ability to engage in demagoguery combined with high intelligence. Think Joe McCarthy with brains.

  • John Pieret

    But of course, Cruz would never admit that because he knows that’s wildly unpopular.

    … outside the teabagger crowd. Before a friendly audience where he knew he wasn’t being recorded, on the other hand …

  • Trebuchet

    Cruz would, of course, enthusiastically support a court decision to overturn SSM in states like Washington, where it was approved by a vote of the people.

  • https://www.facebook.com/hapaxlego Michael Robertson

    Ted Cruz is a near-daily source of embarrassment for many of us living on a weird little island of sanity we like to call “Austin”.

    Also. Ahem. Subject line typo: “Cathphrases”.

    That is all.

  • Trebuchet

    Dang, I forgot to mention the amazingly apt typo in the headliine!

    Does “empty cathphrases” suggest Cruz is talking out of his urethra?

  • D. C. Sessions

    Hmm… Well, if they’re empty cathphrases, that would mean that they’re piss-poor.

  • Taz

    The more Republicans hitch their wagon to an anti-SSM stance the better I like it.

  • D. C. Sessions

    Taz, I really don’t want more Republicans to go full-on anti-SSM. I do want their representatives and candidates to do so, of course. As for the rest of them, I prefer that they make up for their shrinking numbers by shrieking louder.

  • dobby

    I thought Cruz already introduced these into the Senate (actually Senate versions of House bills-amendmant). Is this something new, or just more “hey look at me?

  • cptdoom

    If I’m not mistaken, wasn’t the 14th Amendment also the source of many of the rulings making the two genders equal, and was used as the reason the ERA wasn’t necessary? Certainly the men who passes it never intended for women to be equal to men either, although I would bet Cruz & cronies wouldn’t mind if those decisions were overturned as well.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    The new spirit of Small Government Libertarianism (also, Isolationalism) lives on in the Republican party. Take that, Democrats!

  • dingojack

    Speaking of Kath-phrases….

    : Dingo

  • John Pieret

    Does “empty cathphrases” suggest Cruz is talking out of his urethra?

    I thought it meant he was quoting a Catholic bishop .

  • lorn

    It is important to remember that he is not making a court case, he is, as most legislators are, soon running for office. It is less about legalities than it is about positioning. Wingnuts will suck this line of reasoning up, such as it is, and ask for seconds.

  • mikeym

    Even though they’re identical cousins, I somehow always preferred Cathphrases to Pattiphrases.

  • http://www.facebook.com/den.wilson d.c.wilson

    Cruz would never admit that because he knows that’s wildly unpopular.

    He doesn’t need to. His supporters already know that such things are understood.

  • garnetstar

    Breathing while judging constitutes judicial activism.

  • John Pieret

    Breathing while judging constitutes judicial activism.

    I’d put it as “Thinking while judging constitutes judicial activism.”