By Meg Jalsevac

  HARRISBURG, PA, January 19, 2007 ( – A letter addressed to Massachusetts’ ex-governor Mitt Romney has just been made public in which 44 conservative, pro-family leaders from across the nation requested that before stepping down from office, Romney would adhere to the Massachusetts Constitution and repeal his order directing public officials to perform ‘same-sex marriages’. 

  The letter was hand delivered to members of Romney’s staff on December 20th, 2006 at his office.  Romney took no action to adhere to the letter’s requests before he left office at the beginning of the New Year.

  The letter cited numerous, historical cases and the Massachusetts’ Constitution to assert that Romney’s actions in implementing ‘gay marriage’ were beyond the bounds of his authority as governor. The authors further asserted that his actions were unconstitutional as were the actions of the four initial judges who formulated the official opinion on the matter in the ‘Goodridge’ case, the case that originally brought the matter to national attention.

  Commenting on the ‘Goodridge’ opinion, Judge Robert Bork said that it was “untethered to either the Massachusetts or United States Constitution.”

  As quoted in the letter, the MA Constitution denies the judicial branch of its government any authority over the state’s marriage policies.  So it was that three of the seven judges that heard the Goodrich case strongly dissented that the court did not have authority to formulate laws.

  The letter also outlined how the MA Constitution forbids judges from establishing or altering law.  According to the Constitution, such a task is to be left to the legislature.  The judges’ opinion in the Goodrich case admitted that they were not altering the standing marriage statute in MA. 

  Instead, Governor Romney took it upon himself, despite legal counsel to do otherwise, to order officials across the state that they would have to perform ‘gay marriages’, even though, according to Massachusetts law, to do so is a crime. Officials who refused were advised to resign their position.

  Throughout the whole ordeal, Romney maintained that he was personally against ‘homosexual marriage’ but that he must “execute the law.”  The conservatives’ letter clearly illustrates how Romney was not “executing the law” but merely facilitating the agenda of activist judges – beyond even the judges’ own expectations.

  The letter clearly explained how Romney’s actions, in reality, are a crime under Massachusetts  because of his oath to uphold the Constitution.

  The authors called Romney to task for ignoring the solemnity of the oath of office that he took in which he swore to uphold the Constitution of Massachusetts.  They requested that Romney publicly repeal his orders to perform ‘same-sex marriages’ throughout the state and confirm the fact that, under Massachusetts law, ‘same-sex marriage’ remains illegal. They also ask that Romney publicly take to task the political officials that worked to undermine the constitution to bring about ‘same sex marriage’ in Massachusetts.

  John Haskins, writer and family activist, told, “Mitt Romney’s contribution to history will be that he pro-actively imposed ‘homosexual marriage’ in stark violation of the state Constitution that he swore to uphold.  Those denying this are subverting the rule of law and the plain language of a constitution.”

Haskins expressed frustration at conservatives like Mary Ann Glendon of Harvard and Glen Lavy of the Alliance Defense Fund who he says initially counseled Romney not to permit gay marriage but then defended the governor’s actions saying that he had no choice but to obey the law.  On the MassResistance website, Haskins says, “Our lawyers, law professors and pro-family political leaders are blundering this historic challenge because we have wandered far from the Constitutional texts we swore to defend.  Some of them are realizing this belatedly.  Others appear determined to defend and disguise their own errors (some quite fundamental) at whatever cost to Massachusetts and America.” 

  The legal background and framework of the letter was researched and confirmed by attorney Robert Paine, an expert on the topic of MA’s unconstitutional ‘same-sex marriages’. 

  Of the 44 signers of the Romney letter, several prominent conservative leaders are listed including Paul Weyrich, Free Congress Foundation; Robert H. Knight, veteran Washington political activist and a draftsman of the federal Defense of Marriage Act; Linda Harvey, Mission America; Rev. Ted Pike, National Prayer Network; Randy Thomasson, Campaign for Children and Families; Peter LaBarbera, Americans for Truth; Dr. Chuck Baldwin, radio host and columnist; Paul Likoudis, The Wanderer; Phil Lawler, Catholic World News; David E. Smith, Illinois Family Institute; Michael Heath, Christian Civic League of Maine; Gary Glenn, American Family Association of Michigan; Joe Glover, Family Policy Network; and Bill Cotter, Operation Rescue Boston.

  As reported previously by, Romney is known for flip-flopping and wavering on key social issues.  Coinciding with his bid for the Republican presidential nomination, Romney just recently declared himself a pro-life figure despite a history of inconsistent decisions in life issues. 

  Read the full text of the letter:

  Read ‘Romney Gay Marriage Timeline’ at

  Read Related Coverage:

  Homosexual “Marriage” Not Legal in Massachusetts, Lawyers’ Coalition Says

  Despite Past Statements, Former Gov. and Presidential Hopeful Romney Says He is Pro-Life

  Romney Does Flip-Flop and Forces Catholic Hospitals to Distribute Morning-After-Pill


Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.