Attorney General Eric Holder is obviously a means justifies the ends kind of guy — even when the “means” including trampling on the Constitution and the rights of states to defend their own laws in their own way.

It must be a wonderful thing to know — as Holder apparently does — that he is always right.

This past week Holder decided that the evolutionary approach to same sex marriage — as state by state through court challenges or the ballot box extend marriage rights to same sex couples — wasn’t good enough. So in an interview with the New York Times he advanced the idea that state attorneys general should simply refuse to defend state laws that still prohibit such unions.

“Engaging in that process and making that determination [not to defend] is something that’s appropriate for an attorney general to do,” Holder said.

Now as much as we share the joy of gay couples in Massachusetts and elsewhere who are now able to legally wed and share all the benefits of being a married couple (thanks to the most recent Supreme Court decision that includes federal benefits as well), marriage remains a matter for states to decide. The U.S. Supreme Court did not rule on the issue of a constitutional right to marry.

But, hey, Holder and his boss, Barack Obama (who it should be noted during his first election opposed same sex marriage), have long abused the oath they both took to “protect and defend” the Constitution. Their Constitution is whatever they want it to be — and right now Holder wants it to be a document that denies to states the right to determine who can or cannot marry.

Colorado Attorney General John Suthers, a Republican, wrote in the Washington Post earlier this month, “I personally oppose a number of Colorado’s laws as a matter of public policy” (just guessing but maybe that includes the one legalizing the recreational use of marijuana) “and a few are contrary to my religious beliefs. But as my state’s attorney general, I have defended them all — and will continue to do so.”

It’s what the rule of law means. But then that’s another concept Holder is willing to sacrifice when it conflicts with his personal notions of justice.