BREAKING: Supreme Court will take up Gay Marriage Case

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It will be a 5 – 4 ruling having the effect of invalidating state measures seeking to deny same-sex couples access to marriage law, where such measures violate the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause; the opinion will be written by Justice Kennedy, just as he wrote for the majority in Romer, Lawrence, and Windsor.

It is possible, but unlikely, the Chief Justice will join the majority; if he did his vote would be consistent with settled and accepted 14th Amendment jurisprudence, and communicate to the Nation that the right of gay American to equal protection of the law is also settled and accepted.

 

[rightwinger]

Along with their Obamacare verdict, this case will define the Roberts court. I doubt they want to be ridiculed by history and will either stand up for gay rights or duck the issue on some technicality

 

[Maxx]

I would prefer to see this issue left up to the individual states.

That said, the SCOTUS may actually be doing the Republican Party a huge favor if they do issue a broad ruling affirming 'gay marriage' essentially taking it off the table. Perhaps many gay voters will no longer feel the need to identify with the single interest group they have become, thus no longer allowing themselves to be manipulated by the liberal con artists who take their political contributions and count on their votes.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Maxx, the hatred of the far right social cons is what drives this issue.

 

[rightwinger]

I would prefer to see this issue left up to the individual states.

That said, the SCOTUS may actually be doing the Republican Party a huge favor if they do issue a broad ruling affirming 'gay marriage' essentially taking it off the table. Perhaps many gay voters will no longer feel the need to identify with the single interest group they have become, thus no longer allowing themselves to be manipulated by the liberal con artists who take their political contributions and count on their votes.

Real Republicans would just as soon this issue go away. It is a loser for the party.
The Supreme Court taking it off the table only helps them

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Along with their Obamacare verdict, this case will define the Roberts court. I doubt they want to be ridiculed by history and will either stand up for gay rights or duck the issue on some technicality

Chief Justice Warren faced a similar situation with Brown. Warren correctly understood that only a unanimous ruling would be accepted to end segregation. Even with that unanimous ruling, many states and jurisdictions continued to fight to retain the heinous doctrine of 'separate but equal.'

Obviously a unanimous ruling is impossible with the Marriage Cases currently under review; but clearly a 6 – 3 ruling with the Chief Justice joining the majority would send an important message to the Nation, particularly if Roberts himself authored that majority opinion.

So indeed, this decision will very much define both the Roberts Court and its Chief Justice.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

MAXX SAID:

“I would prefer to see this issue left up to the individual states.”

That may be your preference but it is not an option, as the states have no authority to decide who will or will not have his civil rights. One does not forfeit his civil rights merely as a consequence of his state of residence.

 

[rightwinger]

MAXX SAID:

“I would prefer to see this issue left up to the individual states.”

That may be your preference but it is not an option, as the states have no authority to decide who will or will not have his civil rights. One does not forfeit his civil rights merely as a consequence of his state of residence.

If you could stop gay married couples from moving from state to state it might work. But you can't change from married to unmarried depending on which state you are passing through

SCOTUS needs to decide

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I can't imagine they'll overturn rulings in all of these states at this point.
Should have had this in front of the SCOTUS five years ago.

maybe you need to understand HOW cases get selected?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I could see the justices showing their balls here. If you consider the ages of the supreme court justices I could see them getting bold and overruling the states that allowed gay marriage. These justices grew up knowing marriage is between man and woman and with no real science behind gays supporting why they are the way they are other than an abnormal choice it just makes in easier to confirm it.

We are about to see how liberal these justices are or how old they are. The decision to uphold Obamacare as a tax makes be second guess them as liberal, but their true colors will show in this case. Perhaps another reason to vote against gay marriage to show constitutional balance.

this makes absolutely NO sense

 

[Maxx]

I would prefer to see this issue left up to the individual states.

That said, the SCOTUS may actually be doing the Republican Party a huge favor if they do issue a broad ruling affirming 'gay marriage' essentially taking it off the table. Perhaps many gay voters will no longer feel the need to identify with the single interest group they have become, thus no longer allowing themselves to be manipulated by the liberal con artists who take their political contributions and count on their votes.

Real Republicans would just as soon this issue go away. It is a loser for the party.
The Supreme Court taking it off the table only helps them

My point is that if the political issue of gay marriage were to be taken off the table, many gays would then become motivated to dwell on the other issues at hand.
Surely many would come to realize supporting a big government welfare state is not in their best interests.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

SCOTUS will either (1) go for broke and sanction marriage equality nationally, or (2) leave it the way its right now, for legislatures and courts to work out.

There will be no possibility of turning it all over to what it once was.

Captain Obvious strikes again!

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

1) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex?

2) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state?

They can pussy out on question 1 if they strike down the rest of DOMA a and make 2. a reality.

just sayin'

I don't think Justices deciding constitutional issues in ways you would disagree with is pussying out

The SCOTUS a has consistently pussied out on ruling on marriage equality. I'm saying they can again...if they get rid of DOMA.

legal arguments? why fall into ideological arguments and insults that only further divisiveness?

What are you talking about? The SCOTUS has been pussying out on gay marriage. You cannot deny that fact. They have intentionally NOT been ruling on this issue and sending it back to the lower courts. They have been big fat PUSSIES!

I say fine...if they don't want to rule on marriage equality for the whole country, don't. All they would have to do to shut up all the gays is to strike down the rest of DOMA. If Alabama doesn't want to marry gays, fine don't...BUT a civil marriage performed in CA should be recognized in AL.

How a case is being argued is how it gets to the Court.

Saying they have pussied out, shows ignorance about how the system works. When you try and psychoanalyze you fail

 

[rightwinger]

I would prefer to see this issue left up to the individual states.

That said, the SCOTUS may actually be doing the Republican Party a huge favor if they do issue a broad ruling affirming 'gay marriage' essentially taking it off the table. Perhaps many gay voters will no longer feel the need to identify with the single interest group they have become, thus no longer allowing themselves to be manipulated by the liberal con artists who take their political contributions and count on their votes.

Real Republicans would just as soon this issue go away. It is a loser for the party.
The Supreme Court taking it off the table only helps them

My point is that if the political issue of gay marriage were to be taken off the table, many gays would then become motivated to dwell on the other issues at hand.
Surely many would come to realize supporting a big government welfare state is not in their best interests.

That makes no sense at all
Gays can't support more than one issue at a time?

Regardless, they would not support rightwing fear mongering about big government

And don't call me Shirley

 

[Katzndogz]

I would prefer to see this issue left up to the individual states.

That said, the SCOTUS may actually be doing the Republican Party a huge favor if they do issue a broad ruling affirming 'gay marriage' essentially taking it off the table. Perhaps many gay voters will no longer feel the need to identify with the single interest group they have become, thus no longer allowing themselves to be manipulated by the liberal con artists who take their political contributions and count on their votes.

Real Republicans would just as soon this issue go away. It is a loser for the party.
The Supreme Court taking it off the table only helps them

My point is that if the political issue of gay marriage were to be taken off the table, many gays would then become motivated to dwell on the other issues at hand.
Surely many would come to realize supporting a big government welfare state is not in their best interests.

Gays will not turn their attention to other matters. They will move on to the next phase. Forcing religious people to violate their most deeply held beliefs.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I would prefer to see this issue left up to the individual states.

That said, the SCOTUS may actually be doing the Republican Party a huge favor if they do issue a broad ruling affirming 'gay marriage' essentially taking it off the table. Perhaps many gay voters will no longer feel the need to identify with the single interest group they have become, thus no longer allowing themselves to be manipulated by the liberal con artists who take their political contributions and count on their votes.

Real Republicans would just as soon this issue go away. It is a loser for the party.
The Supreme Court taking it off the table only helps them

My point is that if the political issue of gay marriage were to be taken off the table, many gays would then become motivated to dwell on the other issues at hand.
Surely many would come to realize supporting a big government welfare state is not in their best interests.

lots of gays are libertarians

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Real republicans and conservatives would traditionally be the first to advocate for equal protection rights for gay Americans, and be opposed to measures seeking to deny same-sex couples access to marriage law.

Pity those republicans and conservatives lack the courage to stand up to the ignorance and hate of the social right and take back their party and political philosophy.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Along with their Obamacare verdict, this case will define the Roberts court. I doubt they want to be ridiculed by history and will either stand up for gay rights or duck the issue on some technicality

Chief Justice Warren faced a similar situation with Brown. Warren correctly understood that only a unanimous ruling would be accepted to end segregation. Even with that unanimous ruling, many states and jurisdictions continued to fight to retain the heinous doctrine of 'separate but equal.'

Obviously a unanimous ruling is impossible with the Marriage Cases currently under review; but clearly a 6 – 3 ruling with the Chief Justice joining the majority would send an important message to the Nation, particularly if Roberts himself authored that majority opinion.

So indeed, this decision will very much define both the Roberts Court and its Chief Justice.

Chief Justice Vinson headed a majority against, but he dies. Warren comes in and works for a unanimous ruling for. Both men were politicians.

This ruling along with the PPACA will show Robert's judicial philosophy is not what the left has tried to portray it as. The right is just as wrong about Roberts

 

[JakeStarkey]

SCOTUS will either (1) go for broke and sanction marriage equality nationally, or (2) leave it the way its right now, for legislatures and courts to work out.

There will be no possibility of turning it all over to what it once was.

Captain Obvious strikes again!

Morning, Dante. I see you, the Board squeeze toy, have appeared.

Squeak for us.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

It will be a 5 – 4 ruling having the effect of invalidating state measures seeking to deny same-sex couples access to marriage law, where such measures violate the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause; the opinion will be written by Justice Kennedy, just as he wrote for the majority in Romer, Lawrence, and Windsor.

It is possible, but unlikely, the Chief Justice will join the majority; if he did his vote would be consistent with settled and accepted 14th Amendment jurisprudence, and communicate to the Nation that the right of gay American to equal protection of the law is also settled and accepted.

Why not Roberts supporting 14 amendment arguments?