New GOP gay-ban tactics=The Hill.com=: "All the legislative action on gay marriage is currently in the Senate, but the House GOP is rapidly developing its own tactics. Leaders will take their first step next week when they take up Rep. John Hostettler's (R-Ind.) jurisdiction stripping bill. This would bar federal courts from hearing lawsuits related to gay sex and marriage"

Ok, so it comes down to this? Not only do the right wing republicans want to amend the constitution in order to push through their particular extremist morality, they want to start eliminating the judicial branch?

And why? because they are afraid that the Supreme Court will do something like rule on a constitutional issue?

For those of you that don't follow constitutional law, there is a theory that has been floating around for a while that the legislature could eliminate the power of the Supreme Court to review certain cases but limiting the jurisdiction of federal courts. This will be accomplished by something like a bill that says "no federal court may rule on an issue that we disagree with." It would be something like them saying, "you can rule on whatever you want court, just as long as you never review a case about gay marriage."

Honestly, I think people should be afraid of this. People should be afraid of a congress (or at least Mr. DeLay) who think they should be able have absolute power, unchecked by any other branch. Whether the technical nit-pickers are right about the technical feasibility of this action under Article III is not relevant. Both the "living constitution" and the framers plainly intended meaningful judicial review (since Marbury v. Madison at least). Any action by the legislature limiting the jurisdiction of the courts to review something as fundamental as public policy via marriage and interpersonal relationships would be void as a violation of the 14th amendment, the 6th amendment, the right of contract, and maybe even the 13th amendment.

The problem is that if this type of law were to pass (which I don't think it would, but if it did) when it came to the Supreme Court, we would need a new opinion rising to the art and science of Marbury v. Madison, and I just don't know if there is enough intellectual power on our current court.