Chris Christie - Constitutionist or Con Man?

Well, folks, if you want to know what sort of president Chris Christie would make and how far he'd go to defend the Constitution... here's your answer:

"Same-sex weddings have begun in New Jersey, which has become the 14th state to recognize nuptials between gay partners. Weddings were held in several cities and towns across the state in the first minutes of Monday morning, as soon as a court order requiring the state to recognize gay marriage went into effect."

"Later in the morning, Gov. Chris Christie New Jersey Gov. ordered his administration to withdraw an appeal of a state Supreme Court ruling allowing gay marriages."

But why would Gov. Christie withdraw his appeal?

Should he have withdrawn his appeal?

I ask these questions in the context of asking why did Christie appeal in the first place...???

"Although the Governor strongly disagrees with the Court substituting its judgment for the constitutional process of the elected branches or a vote of the people, the Court has now spoken clearly as to their view of the New Jersey Constitution and, therefore, same-sex marriage is the law," the Christie administration said in a statement.

"The Governor will do his constitutional duty and ensure his Administration enforces the law as dictated by the New Jersey Supreme Court."

But... but... but... I'm totally lost.

So... Christie says he believes that the Court is substituting its judgment for the constitutional process of the elected branches or a vote of the people. Right...???

Clearly the inference is that Christie believes they have no right to do so... or else why this talk of substituting... why any critique at all? Are you following my line of questioning here, folks?

Also... there is a bit of a fly in the ointment of Christie's new-found support of a Court that substitutes its judgment for the constitutional process... namely:

"Same-sex marriages were scheduled to begin Monday at 12:01 a.m. The New Jersey Supreme Court last week refused to delay a lower court order for the state to start recognizing marriages. The case, however, [was] still on appeal."

Folks... the NJ Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the gay marriage issue! Thus... Christie's appeal! It was a lower Court which substituted its judgment for the constitutional process of the elected branches or a vote of the people. This is why Christie could - and did - appeal!

Yes... the NJ Supreme Court did last week refuse to delay a lower court order... and yes, with that action they strongly suggested that should they be forced to rule they too would - like the lower Court - in Christie-speak "substitute their judgment for the constitutional process of the elected branches or a vote of the people," but so what? If Christie actually believed his own statement... if his own statement of self-described beliefs was sincere... why would he withdraw the appeal rather than let the legal battle play out to its conclusion where maybe.. just maybe... the NJ Supreme Court would have surprised everyone by not substituting its judgment for the constitutional process of the elected branches or a vote of the people?

Forget gay marriage. Forget this specific case. Concentrate on the concept here... Christie concept (and mine) that the Court - like a governor... like a legislature... has limited powers. Either Christie believes this or he doesn't! His appeal says "he does." His withdrawal of said appeal says "he doesn't... at least not any longer... and perhaps deed down not even from the first."

I'm guessing Gov. Christie has sworn an oath to uphold... protect... preserve... his state's constitution. I'm fairly certain NJ's constitution doesn't anoint a lone Superior Court judge (nor even the full NY Supreme Court) with dictatorial powers to simply substitute their judgment for the constitutional process of the elected branches or a vote of the people.

Yes... I realize I'm harping on Christie's words... on Christie's supposed beliefs...

The reason I'm doing so is because the man seems to be contradicting himself... talking out of both sides of his mouth...

Does Christie feel he's defending the constitution of New Jersey by... er... surrendering this appeal and thus refusing to defend the constitution of New Jersey?

Seriously, folks... he can't have it both ways. Frankly, I have no idea what Chris Christie actually believes at this point. But I do have a fear. I fear that Chris Christie believes in Chris Christie... in future "President" Chris Christie. And if he has to surrender his constitutional principles in order to see this future come to pass... so be it.

Again, folks, to me this isn't about gay marriage. For what it's worth, my position is that gay marriage should be decided at the state level by either legislative action or voter referendum. (In other words, as far as constitutional law is concerned, I'm with the "old" Chris Christie, the one who fought for the constitutional rule of law in New Jersey.)

Funny thing is, it's Christie who is anti-gay marriage. It's Christie who as governor vetoed a gay marriage bill. As Politico put it in their coverage today of Gov. Christie latest political maneuvering, "Chris Christie doesn’t support gay marriage. ... He has repeatedly made clear where he stands."

Now... unfortunately... Gov. Christie has made clear where he stands on adherence to the constitutional rule of law and faithfulness in defense of the same: He's for it unless he's against it.