F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., July 21, 2006

Most of us who took a civics class in high school understand the reason why our government has in place a system of checks and balances -- to ensure that no one branch of government oversteps its authority. This week, in response to various judicial decisions considered out of line by a majority of Americans, the House of Representatives voted on legislation to protect American families and defend our nation’s values. Two are of particular interest: the Federal Marriage Amendment and the Pledge Protection Act.

On July 18, with my support, the House voted for the Federal Marriage Amendment by a vote of 236 to 187. Though the Amendment garnered even more support this year than it did last Congress, it wasn’t enough to meet the two-thirds vote required in order to amend the Constitution. But it did send a message to the public that Congress listens. The House deliberated on this bill because there are 45 states that have enacted laws providing that marriage shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. These 45 states, which constitute 90% of the United States, represent well more than the 75% required to approve a constitutional amendment.

Marriage matters to the American people, particularly in Wisconsin, where voters will face a ballot question this November relative to the definition of marriage. Yet today, judges are increasingly belittling our views regarding marriage policy. The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, for example, concluded there was "no rational reason" for restricting the benefits of marriage to heterosexual couples. Even The Washington Post was shocked by the Massachusetts judges’ decision, stating in a recent editorial that: "we are skeptical that American society will come to formally recognize gay relationships as a result of judicial fiats."

The following day, also with my support, the House passed the Pledge Protection Act by a final tally of 260 to 167. This bill protects our country’s Pledge by preventing radical judges and liberal lawyers from questioning the constitutionality of the phrase "under God." It does this by removing the Pledge from the jurisdiction of federal courts, which Congress can do as part of our system of checks and balances.

When Congress passed the bill many years ago adding the words "under God" to the Pledge, it stated its belief that those words in no way run contrary to the First Amendment, but instead reflect the guidance of God in our nation’s affairs. The Pledge of Allegiance is not a religious statement or prayer, but instead, it is an expression of allegiance to the ideas and principles on which our nation was founded. No one is required to recite the Pledge, and if anyone disagrees with it or chooses to refrain from saying it, he or she is free to do so.

One should note that neither of these bills takes away powers from states -- they were written to preserve the authority of state legislatures. But these bills do reflect the view of our nation. Working within our system of checks and balances, the House this week sent a message -- Americans are tired of irrational decisions made by activist judges who have their own political agenda.

Congressman James Sensenbrenner, a Republican, represents the Fifth Congressional District of Wisconsin. He serves as chairman of the House Committee on the Judiciary. The Fifth District of Wisconsin forms an arc surrounding Milwaukee to the North and West, and includes parts of Jefferson, Milwaukee and Waukesha counties, and all of Ozaukee and Washington counties.