Do SCOTUS' Gay Marriage Stays-In-Interim Apply to All 50 States?

[Silhouette]

The Salt Lake Tribune carried a big story on the all or nothing effort by Utah to get the case in front of SCOTUS. Needs four votes to hear it. If it doesn't, then Utah will be marriage equality and I think the circuit court for the district will follow suit.

Utah files same-sex marriage appeal with U.S. Supreme Court Amendment 3 » The state is using its last chance to keep the ban on same-sex unions.

Utah files same-sex marriage appeal with U.S. Supreme Court | The Salt Lake Tribune

Four votes? Sotomayor will be one "aye" and the other three are a slam-dunk. She approved the stay didn't she?

Of course after the 10th, the Supreme Court is the last chance for Utah to gain permanent instead of just temporary protection for its one man/ one woman marriage law.

What is this Jake? A course in poly-sci 101? Yes, after the 10th circuit is the US Supreme Court.

Who won't, I guarantee you, be the first Court to mandate polygamy without appeal in Utah via a behavioral-precedent....& against a stunning majority [2/3rds] in that state.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Polygamy would not get one of five votes in Utah.

I am very sure that Sotomayor will vote to allow the process to extend to a ruling that makes marriage equality throughout the land.

 

[ShackledNation]

And there we have it. The clear and irrefutable reality of how stays work and their effect. Can we move on now, Silhouette?

Well that all sounds neat and tidy but when lawyers use the actions of SCOTUS and cite them in a challenge to uphold California [or another state's] voters' civil rights to have their vote count as much as Utahans, you saying "potato" and me saying "po-taa-to" may not be as cut and dried as you think.

Your entire argument was just destroyed. The stay granted to the Utah case applies only to the Utah case. No ifs, ands, or buts. Get over it.

 

[ShackledNation]

Sil, what are you going to do WHEN the Supreme Court rules that gay marriage bans are unconstitutional?

If they change the constitutional Finding in Windsor? So soon?

I guess that's that. The Supreme Court is the end of the line. I've got a question for you...What are you going to do WHEN the Supreme Court reaffirms Windsor and tells everyone it is and always has been up to the states to decide?

Just wondering what the cult of LGBT's game plan is then?

There would be no constitutional finding changed. Windsor did not address the constitutionality of state same-sex marriage bans. If anything, striking down same-sex marriage bans would be in line with the Windsor reasoning, a logical extension of it to the states.

 

[Silhouette]

Polygamy would not get one of five votes in Utah.

I am very sure that Sotomayor will vote to allow the process to extend to a ruling that makes marriage equality throughout the land.

You say you're a lawyer and yet in that two line post you placed two diametrically opposed principles juxtaposed next to each other..

It's clear how delusional your wishful-thinking is at this point. On the one hand you know how bound the Justices are by anticipating setting unwieldy precedents. Then you admit how completely unpopular polygamy is in Utah. Then you go on to say that Sotomayor will facilitate spreading "marriage equality throughout the land".

Equality for whom? Just a few people under the hash-tag "LGBT"?

Here's how your hoped-for SCOTUS verdict is forming-up in your mind. You're thinking SCOTUS will write an opinion that says something like "we have found that allowing marriage for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders must be an innate right across the US in the name of equality. But in no way does this mean people who practice polygamy may join under that protection."

Dude, you are HIGH on crack if you think that's going to be their verdict. Enjoy la-la land while you can...

 

[JoeB131]

Sil, what are you going to do WHEN the Supreme Court rules that gay marriage bans are unconstitutional?

If they change the constitutional Finding in Windsor? So soon?

I guess that's that. The Supreme Court is the end of the line. I've got a question for you...What are you going to do WHEN the Supreme Court reaffirms Windsor and tells everyone it is and always has been up to the states to decide?

Just wondering what the cult of LGBT's game plan is then?

You can keep stomping your little feet claiming Windsor says something it doesn't say. Windsor ONLY limited itself to the Federal definition. It did NOT rule on the "Full Faith" clause, and it did not rule on Perry's assertation that gay marriage bans are a violation of the 14th Amendment. In fact, they punted by saying the Homophobes in California didn't have standing to challenge the ruling if the State refused to.

Since then, dozens of courts have found gay marriage bans to be unconstitutional. Not one has upheld them as constitutional. I'm frankly not worried the courts are going to ignore EVERY lower court and overturn all their decisions.

even if they did, the tidal gravity has changed, and popular opinion has shifted in favor of gay marriage nationally. Gay marriage advocates will be able to get through the legislatures and ballot boxes what they can't get through the courts.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Polygamy would not get one of five votes in Utah.

I am very sure that Sotomayor will vote to allow the process to extend to a ruling that makes marriage equality throughout the land.

You say you're a lawyer and yet in that two line post you placed two diametrically opposed principles juxtaposed next to each other..

It's clear how delusional your wishful-thinking is at this point. On the one hand you know how bound the Justices are by anticipating setting unwieldy precedents. Then you admit how completely unpopular polygamy is in Utah. Then you go on to say that Sotomayor will facilitate spreading "marriage equality throughout the land".

Equality for whom? Just a few people under the hash-tag "LGBT"?

Here's how your hoped-for SCOTUS verdict is forming-up in your mind. You're thinking SCOTUS will write an opinion that says something like "we have found that allowing marriage for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders must be an innate right across the US in the name of equality. But in no way does this mean people who practice polygamy may join under that protection."

Dude, you are HIGH on crack if you think that's going to be their verdict. Enjoy la-la land while you can...

You are the only one who said I am a lawyer.

I know exactly what SCOTUS is setting up, which has nothing to do with a polygamy vote in Utah. And your mindless chattering about Windsor is very embarrassing for you.

You are now so stressed that marriage equality is going to happen that you are only nattering.

 

[Silhouette]

Polygamy would not get one of five votes in Utah.

I am very sure that Sotomayor will vote to allow the process to extend to a ruling that makes marriage equality throughout the land.

You say you're a lawyer and yet in that two line post you placed two diametrically opposed principles juxtaposed next to each other..

It's clear how delusional your wishful-thinking is at this point. On the one hand you know how bound the Justices are by anticipating setting unwieldy precedents. Then you admit how completely unpopular polygamy is in Utah. Then you go on to say that Sotomayor will facilitate spreading "marriage equality throughout the land".

Equality for whom? Just a few people under the hash-tag "LGBT"?

Here's how your hoped-for SCOTUS verdict is forming-up in your mind. You're thinking SCOTUS will write an opinion that says something like "we have found that allowing marriage for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders must be an innate right across the US in the name of equality. But in no way does this mean people who practice polygamy may join under that protection."

Dude, you are HIGH on crack if you think that's going to be their verdict. Enjoy la-la land while you can...

You are the only one who said I am a lawyer.

I know exactly what SCOTUS is setting up, which has nothing to do with a polygamy vote in Utah. And your mindless chattering about Windsor is very embarrassing for you.

You are now so stressed that marriage equality is going to happen that you are only nattering.

Elaborate.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You say you're a lawyer and yet in that two line post you placed two diametrically opposed principles juxtaposed next to each other..

It's clear how delusional your wishful-thinking is at this point. On the one hand you know how bound the Justices are by anticipating setting unwieldy precedents. Then you admit how completely unpopular polygamy is in Utah. Then you go on to say that Sotomayor will facilitate spreading "marriage equality throughout the land".

Equality for whom? Just a few people under the hash-tag "LGBT"?

Here's how your hoped-for SCOTUS verdict is forming-up in your mind. You're thinking SCOTUS will write an opinion that says something like "we have found that allowing marriage for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders must be an innate right across the US in the name of equality. But in no way does this mean people who practice polygamy may join under that protection."

Dude, you are HIGH on crack if you think that's going to be their verdict. Enjoy la-la land while you can...

You are the only one who said I am a lawyer.

I know exactly what SCOTUS is setting up, which has nothing to do with a polygamy vote in Utah. And your mindless chattering about Windsor is very embarrassing for you.

You are now so stressed that marriage equality is going to happen that you are only nattering.

Elaborate.

On your delusions? We all know what they are. SCOTUS is not interested in polygamy at all, and neither is 99% of America. Your use of it is a red herring.

 

[Inevitable]

You are the only one who said I am a lawyer.

I know exactly what SCOTUS is setting up, which has nothing to do with a polygamy vote in Utah. And your mindless chattering about Windsor is very embarrassing for you.

You are now so stressed that marriage equality is going to happen that you are only nattering.

Elaborate.

On your delusions? We all know what they are. SCOTUS is not interested in polygamy at all, and neither is 99% of America. Your use of it is a red herring.

Meh, the scotus is going to do whatit's going to do. We will just have to wait and see. If Sil is wrong, he will know.

 

[Silhouette]

Elaborate.

On your delusions? We all know what they are. SCOTUS is not interested in polygamy at all, and neither is 99% of America. Your use of it is a red herring.

No, you said this:

I know exactly what SCOTUS is setting up, which has nothing to do with a polygamy vote in Utah

And I want you to elaborate on what "I know what SCOTUS is setting up.." means. What is SCOTUS setting up?

 

[Silhouette]

So, what is SCOTUS "setting up" Jake?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Elaborate.

On your delusions? We all know what they are. SCOTUS is not interested in polygamy at all, and neither is 99% of America. Your use of it is a red herring.

No, you said this:

I know exactly what SCOTUS is setting up, which has nothing to do with a polygamy vote in Utah

And I want you to elaborate on what "I know what SCOTUS is setting up.." means. What is SCOTUS setting up?

I already have many times before. One of them is your nonsensical conflation of marriage equality and polygamy: that is horse shit. Get your shovel and clean it up.

Sotomayor is committed to marriage equality, thus her drawing in the strings from the various appellate courts to USSC. She wants one ruling that will be controlling in the entire country. She has the four libs, including herself, Kennedy and Roberts, and possibly Scalia.

6-3 for marriage equality.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We are going to get to observe a towering Sil melt down.

Fun.

 

[Silhouette]

We are going to get to observe a towering Sil melt down.

Fun.

Well after 49 countries and states in Europe just handed down a verdict from the European Court of Human Rights that says gays don't have a human right to marry, I'd say the observation tower should have windows facing your direction.

[Post #38]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...t-rules-gay-marriage-not-a-human-right-3.html

 

[Silhouette]

I already have many times before. One of them is your nonsensical conflation of marriage equality and polygamy: that is horse shit. Get your shovel and clean it up.

Sotomayor is committed to marriage equality, thus her drawing in the strings from the various appellate courts to USSC. She wants one ruling that will be controlling in the entire country. She has the four libs, including herself, Kennedy and Roberts, and possibly Scalia.

6-3 for marriage equality.

FYI, Kennedy at least will be primarily considering the civil rights of orphaned children up for adoption and secondarily the alleged civil rights of those who want access to them when making up his mind about gay marriage:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-forced-to-adopt-orphans-to-these-people.html

 

[Inevitable]

​

We are going to get to observe a towering Sil melt down.

Fun.

The dipshit already melted down. Even if the scotus upholds the current laws gay pride parades are still going to happen. Gay men are still going to make out. And out will nit be over. People will still sure bakers, Mozilla's CEO will still be fired. So on.

 

[Silhouette]

​

We are going to get to observe a towering Sil melt down.

Fun.

The dipshit already melted down. Even if the scotus upholds the current laws gay pride parades are still going to happen. Gay men are still going to make out. And out will nit be over. People will still sure bakers, Mozilla's CEO will still be fired. So on.

[you sound a little angry Inevitable, want to talk about it?]

Nope. Those trends will all end when the overall "new wave" of "gay is cool" is flattened out by the press releases on just how not-cool that lifestyle is start hitting the media...

...stay tuned...it's coming...about October this year and two years from now with a heavy peppering in 2015 for good measure...

 

[Inevitable]

​

We are going to get to observe a towering Sil melt down.

Fun.

The dipshit already melted down. Even if the scotus upholds the current laws gay pride parades are still going to happen. Gay men are still going to make out. And out will nit be over. People will still sure bakers, Mozilla's CEO will still be fired. So on.

[you sound a little angry Inevitable, want to talk about it?]

Nope. Those trends will all end when the overall "new wave" of "gay is cool" is flattened out by the press releases on just how not-cool that lifestyle is start hitting the media...

...stay tuned...it's coming...about October this year and two years from now with a heavy peppering in 2015 for good measure...

Nothing is going to stop it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sil is chattering mindlessly like a chipmunk, simply denying the reality of social change.

Marriage equality is coming soon.