Favorite

Court of last resort 

The Arkansas Supreme Court heard arguments last week on two lawsuits aimed at reducing voters' ballot choices Nov. 2. Conservative decisions in both cases won't be viewed as such by losing parties you can be sure. Case 1: The Democratic Party challenged petitions to put Ralph Nader on the Arkansas ballot as a presidential candidate. Circuit Judge Tim Fox ruled that state law is clear and unambiguous. Petitions must be submitted by voters who state they are signing for "their candidate." It is indisputable that the Republican Party gathered Republican signatures to put Nader on the ballot in hopes of draining votes from John Kerry. I didn't think it was particularly good politics for the Democratic Party to file this suit. It's too easy to portray the suit as undemocratic. And you may not think this law makes much sense. But it is the law. You can bet that Republican conservatives who rail against activist judges don't want a literal reading of the law here. Gov. Mike Huckabee calls it "political hardball" to ask that the law be obeyed. The state Republican house organ, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, calls it "picky" and "petty." The conservative newspaper has similar disinterest in enforcing the clear language of the state Constitution, which Republican Marvin Parks flaunts in drawing his fat state expense reimbursements. Then there's Case 2, the amendment to ban same-sex marriage and allow the benefits of marriage only to married heterosexual couples. Praise Justice Ray Thornton for pointing out during oral arguments one of the vagaries of this misleadingly named amendment. He asked if the amendment would not construe head-of-household income tax status as substantially similar to marital status. Could the state legally grant such a tax benefit to an unmarried person if the amendment is adopted? It is a shame that the ACLU waited so long to file this suit. The justices are understandably reluctant to rule on ballot questions at the 11th hour. It is a shame, too, that this amendment is virtually certain to pass if it is not removed from the ballot. But removal is the proper course, if years of precedent on the importance of clarity in amendment names and ballot titles means anything. Supporters of the marriage ban - generally far-right conservatives - hope activist judges will read a little flexibility into the usual strict judicial standards. Still, it would be more satisfying to have a vote and for Arkansas to vote "no" to discrimination. It is not a ridiculous notion. Michigan, too, will be voting this fall on a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage and "any equivalent relationship." The amendment has come under fierce attack there by opponents who say it could wreck domestic partner benefits for both gay and straight unmarried couples. This endangers, for example, coverage of unmarried partners by government insurance programs. Both teacher unions in Michigan have opposed the amendment. They've noted that the amendment could invalidate laws that bar discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodation on the basis of marital status. Because of the rising opposition, polls show support for the Michigan amendment eroding, to 54 percent in September polling. Might more information move Arkansas in Michigan's direction? Here's hoping.
Favorite

Sign up for the Daily Update email

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

More by Max Brantley

  • Where's the outrage?

    Am I the only person, apart from federal prosecutors, outraged about the criminal enterprise that inveigled itself into a privileged position as an Arkansas taxpayer-financed human services provider to the tune, today, of $43 million a year?
    • Jun 21, 2018
  • Where's the outrage?

    • Jun 21, 2018
  • Rutledge opponent hits her socializing with corporate interests

    Mike Lee, the Democratic candidate for attorney general, has criticized Attorney General Leslie Rutledge over recent reports of her participation at private meetings where corporate interests make big contributions to a political group she heads for access to state legal officers.
    • Jun 21, 2018
  • More »

Readers also liked…

  • Double-talk

    A couple of instances of doublespeak cropped up in Little Rock over the weekend.
    • Jun 29, 2017
  • Along the civil rights trail

    A convergence of events in recent days signaled again how far we have come and how far we have yet to go in civil rights.
    • Jan 18, 2018
  • The Oval outhouse

    One thing all Americans finally can agree upon is that public discourse has coarsened irretrievably in the era of Donald Trump and largely at his instance.
    • Jan 18, 2018

Latest in Max Brantley

  • Where's the outrage?

    Am I the only person, apart from federal prosecutors, outraged about the criminal enterprise that inveigled itself into a privileged position as an Arkansas taxpayer-financed human services provider to the tune, today, of $43 million a year?
    • Jun 21, 2018
  • Where's the outrage?

    • Jun 21, 2018
  • The Arkansas swamp

    The Arkansas Capitol is a fetid swamp of corruption and the bipartisan lack of concern tells you plenty.
    • Jun 14, 2018
  • More »

Most Recent Comments

  • Re: The cult of Trump

    • That isn't what I said, and you know that pretty well, Oaf. Just lies and…

    • on June 23, 2018
  • Re: The cult of Trump

    • Rabbi, you probably don't know Steven. He's the head Kool-Aid taster for the Trump cult…

    • on June 22, 2018
  • Re: The cult of Trump

    • Those traits sound like most any politician in DC, mostly the Dims.

    • on June 22, 2018
 

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