In March, a federal judge overturned a state constitutional amendment in Michigan banning same-sex marriage. Last week, the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned this ruling, which had the effect of upholding Michigan’s gay marriage ban.

Before getting into the opinion portion of this editorial, we want to be clear about what will be addressed. There will be no opinion stated regarding the gay marriage ban itself, as everyone is entitled to their own opinion and reasoning. Instead, we will focus on the power of the courts.

In the Roe v. Wade case, it was decided that women had the right to an abortion under the 14^th Amendment to the Constitution, which grants equal protection under the law. Though this case happened over 40 years ago in 1973, the abortion issue is still a hot topic for discussion. It continues to divide people across the U.S., similar to today’s debate over gay marriage.

This was a case where the court made a decision that should have been decided by the states. The 10^th Amendment states that, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people.” Decisions that carry such weight in redefining the country – such as the abortion issue or the definition of marriage – should be reserved for each state and its people instead of being decided by the courts.

In Michigan’s case, it was decided by people of the state that gay marriage should be banned. This is not to say whether this ban was right or wrong, but in defense of the fact that the state had the right to make this decision – a right granted to it in the 10^th Amendment. At this point in time, this state constitutional amendment will only be changed when the people of Michigan decide to do so, instead of having the federal government declare what all states must do. If the views have changed since the amendment was passed, which may be the case, then the people should put this issue back on the ballot again.

Major social changes that are decided by the federal government seem to tear people apart instead of bringing them together. People have very different opinions, especially regarding long-standing cultural norms. We applaud the court for allowing the states to determine their own destiny instead of deciding it unilaterally for them.