Hamby decision is a violation of the democratic process

To the editor:

The ruling by federal Judge Tim Burgess against Alaska’s constitution and statutes on marriage mirrors the trend of judicial activism that has been sweeping our nation. As an Alaskan I treasure state sovereignty. Allowing one federal judge to overturn our constitution, a long standing tradition and the will of Alaska’s voters, is cause for outrage.

In 1998, Alaskans voted nearly 70 percent in favor of an amendment to the Alaska constitution, to protect our definition of marriage against similar activism by another judge, Peter Michalski. Because our constitution provides ultimate authority to the people, not state courts, we were able to trump that judge with our constitution, making Alaska the first state in the U.S. to do so. Unfortunately, our state constitution does not protect us against overreach by federal judges. I applaud Governor Sean Parnell’s willingness to appeal the Burgess decision against federal overreach, even in the face of long odds against the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Abraham Lincoln said, “We, the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution." To retain a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, we must resist this overreach and reestablish the proper role of the courts. The question of what marriage should be is an important public policy issue that deserves discussion, but a change should never be forced on us through the judiciary.

Rep. Lora Reinbold

Eagle River