I have to wonder whether Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley understands the constitutional form of government or have all the liberal politicians in this state decided that the work of transforming society to their utopian vision is too important to trust to the hoi polloi?
“I think we can easily anticipate that if the proposed amendment was successful, there would be protracted, hard-fought litigation about the constitutionality of such a provision,” she said in a speech at the annual dinner of the Massachusetts Lesbian & Gay Bar Association. “If that battle is necessary, you have my support.”
Now correct me if I’m wrong, but I always thought that a constitutional amendment, if enacted according to the provisions laid out in the constitution, is de facto constitutional since it is the constitution. That would be like declaring the First Amendment unconstitutional.
This is either naked political corruption by a politician who is promising to blatantly defy the will of the people and the rule of law or she’s simply so incompetent as to not know that a constitutional amendment is, by its nature, constitutional.
Perhaps Coakley plans to challenge the process by which the amendment is passed, which is also strange since it’s not passed yet. If she knows of funny business in the process so far, why hasn’t she brought a legal challenge? Or maybe she’s just anticipating finding a dishonest and politically convenient pretext on which to bring a challenge later.
Coakley is making a transparent political play to elevate her own profile and pander to a small minority of well-connected and deep-pocketed liberal elites. (Also keep in mind that the attorney general of Massachusetts is an elected, not appointed, constitutional officer.)
Boston College Law prof supports Coakley