Before everyone jumps on me about the implications of that, read further.
Judges are supposed to INTERPRET the law, and this judge believes the law is unconstitutional. If this judge believes that, she must rule against its enforcement.
The Executive branch's responsibility is to ENFORCE the law, whether the Administration agrees with it or not. And enforcing the law means appealing when a lower court says it is unconstitutional. Until the Supreme Court makes a finding of constitutionality, the assumption is that the law is VALID, it stands and must be enforced.
The other alternative is that the Congress can CHANGE the law by ENACTING new law (or not) before the Supreme Court rules.
This forces the Congress to take responsibility for their actions. Each individual law maker must stand up and say YES or NO in PUBLIC.
Even my 8th grader understands checks and balances and division of power in our system. Sheesh.
