First, human rights are not a state rights issue. It's a federal concern.
Second, find here Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution:
Clause 2: In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
I see nothing
whereby the Congress has the authority or the ability to dictate what cases or concerns are subject to review by the federal court system. They may be able to remove the Supreme Court from jurisdiction, but be rest assured that the federal court system below the Supreme Court will continue to fight for the continuation of rights, not the ending of them.
These are NOT activist courts as neo-conservative prefer to label them. These courts, both on the state and federal level, have a responsibility to interpret various laws as written, and with the U.S. Constitution and her amendments as the supreme law of the law, make decisions regarding the constitutionally of said laws. A legislature writes a law restricting the rights and privileges of a select group of people; the courts finds this a violation of the equal protections amendment (and rightly so). It's quite simple.
If you want to live in a society by which the laws are dictated through a religious authority, move to Iran. The United States is a secular federal republic and the government has an obligation to protect the rights of ALL
citizens, not just those that wear a cross, slap a Jesus-fish on the back of their SUV
and mindlessly follow George W. Bush.
[Edited 2004-07-14 23:15:21]
[Edited 2004-07-14 23:24:32]
Ignorantia juris neminem excusat.