Because the act fatally compromises the independence of the judiciary and hopelessly blurs the line between the role of our courts and law enforcement, we have no choice but to declare the act unconstitutional.

The legislature seems to have included gay people in our entire social construct. In light of that, what is the state's legitimate objective in not allowing marriage?

This case is an accident. It is not an intentional act.

His answer was, 'I am concerned with judicial independence. Congress can prescribe standards, but when Congress starts to act like a court and prescribe particular remedies in particular cases, Congress has overstepped its bounds.'

When we were kids, we'd go to the playground, choose up sides and act as our own umpires. With the umpiring historically bad, maybe the players' union could implement this idea.

In 1765, Parliament passed the Stamp Act, which, as any American high school student can tell you, was an act that apparently had something to do with stamps.