Davy Carter explains his procedural vote on gay discrimination resolution | Arkansas Blog

Friday, May 16, 2014

Davy Carter explains his procedural vote on gay discrimination resolution

Posted By on Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:58 PM

click to enlarge DAVY CARTER: 'Judicial intimidation' not appropriate.
  • DAVY CARTER: 'Judicial intimidation' not appropriate.
Republicans are furious that House Speaker Davy Carter, a Republican, voted this morning against suspending the rules so that the Legislative Council could take up Sen. Jason Rapert's resolution in support of Amendment 83, overturned by Judge Chris Piazza, which mandates discrimination against gay couples. He endeavors to explain.

“I believe in our constitution and our system of government. Whether or not our state's constitutional amendment runs afoul of the United States Constitution is a question for our highest court. Judicial intimidation by the legislative branch is not appropriate in this instance or any other.”

Carter is a lawyer. He understands how the law works. Of course, Rapert, too, knows better. But he's a rank demagogue. Rapert intended to intimidate the Arkansas Supreme Court. Intimidation is a core principle of GOP politics. You almost bet they were happy with today's  temporary procedural setback. They immediately set out to demonize the entire Democratic Party for the outcome, rather than peashooting at the handful of Democrats, all electorally safe, who were brave enough to oppose them. Several Democrats joined the Republicans on the meaningless resolution. Their thanks was being labeled with the same queer-loving brand.

The resolution was meaningless and factually inaccurate. Voters don't have the ability to override judicial constitutional review, as Rapert suggests.

Much as I appreciate Carter's vote today, he doesn't have clean hands. He's voted for both legislation and overrides of legislation that he knew wouldn't withstand constitutional scrutiny in the courts. And those votes had far greater meaning than today's empty Rapert gesture. See the current imposition of Voter ID rules that are keeping poor, elderly and minority voters away from the polls.

Tags: , , ,


Sign up for the Daily Update email
Favorite

Comments

Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

More by Max Brantley

  • Ted Suhl seeks Supreme Court review of conviction. Also a note on a similar case

    Ted Suhl has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review his federal bribery conviction for giving money to Steven Jones, a legislator and an official of the state Human Services Department, which oversaw millions in Medicaid reimbursements to his in-patient and out-patient businesses working with troubled youth. Which reminds me of the ongoing Preferred Family Healthcare probe.
    • Jun 25, 2018
  • 1,000 words in mug shot after murder arrest

    A murder arrest mug shot speaks volumes.
    • Jun 25, 2018
  • Supreme Court again dodges gay bias case

    The U.S. Supreme Court today in an unsigned order said a lower court should reconsider the case of a florist in the state of Washington who refused to make an arrangement for a same-sex wedding.
    • Jun 25, 2018
  • More »

Readers also liked…

Most Viewed

Most Recent Comments

Slideshows

 

© 2018 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation