Kamala Harris Defies Democracy
With the words, “a threat to democracy” some voters might think Progressives are referring to Donald Trump. Far more concerning, however, are Democrats who won’t acknowledge that Kamala Harris purposely ignored voters, before she blatantly refused to defend the state constitution?
A Progressive Wish List
Would a Kamal Harris, as president, ignore the law to fulfill whatever progressives’ little hearts’ desire:
- declaring climate emergencies
- defunding the police
- allowing noncitizens to vote
- taxing unrealized capital gains
- instituting reparations
- shutting down Twitter as a threat to national security
Disregarding Oaths a Dangerous Precedent
Kamala’s methods defied democracy and established a dangerous precedent, Kessler argues, who worries that Harris could be president.
“Ms. Harris may similarly disregard voters, the law, and her presidential oath to implement price controls, confiscate guns, impose Medicare for all or ban fracking and—please, no—red meat.
San Fran’s Winter of Love
In February and March 2024, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom issued several thousand marriage licenses for same-sex couples.
The California Supreme Court soon determined the city had no authority to do so. Four years later, the same court ruled that California’s statutes limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples violated the California Constitution.
Proponents of traditional marriage soon sponsored Proposition 8, a November 2008 ballot measure to amend the constitution, stating that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” It passed 52.2% to 47.8%.
In 2009 the California Supreme Court ruled that Proposition 8 was permissible and “carves out a narrow and limited exception to these state constitutional rights, reserving the official designation of the term ‘marriage’ for the union of opposite-sex couples as a matter of state constitutional law.”
At her victory party in 2010, elected AG Harris, declared she would “not defend Proposition 8 because it is simply unconstitutional.”
It passed 52.2% to 47.8%. In 2009 the California Supreme Court ruled that Proposition 8 was permissible and “carves out a narrow and limited exception to these state constitutional rights, reserving the official designation of the term ‘marriage’ for the union of opposite-sex couples as a matter of state constitutional law.”
What Didn’t Settle
In August 2010, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional under the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the 14th Amendment. The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals immediately stayed the decision pending appeal.
Never mind that it was still in California’s Constitution—and that (Harris), like every lawyer in California, had sworn to “support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California.”
As the high court heard oral arguments in Hollingsworth v. Perry in March 2013, Ms. Harris again stated, “I declined to defend Proposition 8 because it violates the Constitution. The Supreme Court has described marriage as a fundamental right 14 times since 1888. The time has come for this right to be afforded to every citizen.”
That was politicking—and, again, recklessly premature as she ignored the current law. Kamala, instead, could have recused herself over her values.
The Biden-Harris administration has defied the law:
- student-loans forgiveness
- influencing social-media censorship in violation of the First Amendment,
- spying on George Floyd demonstrators and Jan. 6 Capitol rioters
- using executive orders to open the border
Hopefully we’ll never know what would happen under a Kamala Harris administration, but it wouldn’t be the first time Harris has defied Democracy.
If you’re willing to fight for Main Street America, click here to sign up for the Richardcyoung.com free weekly email.
