Attorney General candidate Mark Brnovich made a statement following the ruling (and current AG Tom Horne’s decision to not appeal) on Friday, Oct. 17 that allowed same-sex marriage here in Arizona that was banal in it’s the-law-is-the-lawness:

State and local officials now have an obligation to put aside politics and personal feelings and uphold the law, in accordance with the court’s decision.

But make no mistake, he’s very much against the ruling and judicial advocacy and same-sex marriage and everything, as he said on KFYI yesterday.

This article appears in Oct 16-22, 2014.

The editor of the Tucson Weekly. I have no idea how I got here.

8 replies on “Surprising to No One, GOP AG Candidate Brnovich Finds Same-Sex Marriage “Wrong””

  1. Brnovich has shown himself to be wholly unqualified for the office of attorney general. He says, “It bothers me when courts undermine the will of Arizona voters.”

    Well, Mark, it bothers ME when a majority of voters undermines the constitutional rights of the minority. And it bothers ME when second-rate lawyers like you call it “dangerous precedent” for judges to uphold their obligation to protect people from the violation of their constitutional rights, as if judges are doing something nefarious. And it bothers me when you cast the issue of violation of constitutional rights as an issue of “right and wrong” where you think what is wrong is striking down laws that violate constitutional rights. How the hell did you make it out of law school you pandering, pathetic excuse for a lawyer?

  2. And what does the former director of the Goldwater Institute’s (laughable) Center for Constitutional Government think about the Supreme Court overturning the will of the people in Citizens United or the Shelby County case striking down the most important provision of the Voting Rights Act? Was the court’s action a “dangerous precedent in our republic” as you said it was in the marriage equality case? Can you spin that one?

  3. Quite the compliment there. I guess you have to consider the audience.

    I do have to wonder what is next.

  4. An activist judiciary in the defense of conservative dogmas is no vice. An activist judiciary in the defense of civil rights for a minority is a vice. No one elected the Goldwater jerks.

  5. It is interesting how it has gone from “tolerance” for gay people, which few would disagree with, to embracing the lifestyle. It is now considered homophobic if you don’t believe in same sex marriage. Reminds me more of totalitarianism than liberalism.

  6. We have become a country that has no tolerance for gray people. It seems OK to deny them the same rights as others. They have no representation.

  7. Perhaps he’s married to a direct decendant of Ivan the Terrible, which is why he’s so much against marriage.

    I’m just thinking that he looks more like the Jailer at Kremlin Gulag, than an Arizona Attorney General… but with the way the Republican Party in Arizona is, who would know the difference?

Comments are closed.