Gay Marriage Advocates Hope for Sweeping Supreme Court Ruling

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Political Junky, May 10, 2012.

  1. Political Junky
    Offline

    Political Junky Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    19,542
    Thanks Received:
    2,948
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,534
    Gay Marriage Advocates Hope for Sweeping Supreme Court Ruling, Right? Wrong! - ABC News

    Hours after winning a landmark case in a California federal appeals court that struck down the state’s ban on gay marriage, lawyer Theodore B. Olson, who had filed a lawsuit against the ban known as Proposition 8, talked about the odds of the Supreme Court taking up the case.
    “This issue will go to the Supreme Court, I think it will go to the Supreme Court in this case, ” he told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.
    But because the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit was so specific to California’s unique history with same-sex marriage, some legal analysts believe the justices might pass on the case. Or if the court took it up, it would rule narrowly on Proposition 8 –saving the broader question of whether gays and lesbians have a right to marry for another day.
    And that would be just fine for some advocates of gay marriage.
    “If by some chance the Supreme Court decided today that same-sex couples had a right to marry, I could see an enormous outcry and a push for a federal constitutional amendment that would ban it. Even if it lost, that would be a nightmare.” E. J. Graff writes in The American Prospect.
    Before the challenge to Prop 8 was brought to federal court by the American Foundation for Equal Rights and its lead lawyers, Olson and David Boies, other longtime same-sex marriage litigators focused more on challenging laws that prohibit gay marriage at the state level.
    “When Olson and Boies brought this, there was a fear by some members of the gay rights community that you could get an adverse ruling in federal court that would slow political momentum and shut legal doors, ” says Jane Schacter, a professor at Stanford Law School.
    The preferred strategy was to go state by state, picking the states very carefully and working to legalize gay marriage at the state level.
    <more>
     
  2. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,537
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,152
    Of course they do. They cant win their position through the elective process so they have to hope some unelected judges force their positions on the people instead.
     
  3. Political Junky
    Offline

    Political Junky Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    19,542
    Thanks Received:
    2,948
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,534
  4. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,537
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,152
    He can argue it all he wants. It's not true.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. PredFan
    Offline

    PredFan Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2011
    Messages:
    29,190
    Thanks Received:
    4,422
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    In Liberal minds, rent free.
    Ratings:
    +11,619
    Hopefully they will get thier ruling and this issue will go away.

    If it gets to the SCOTUS, I cannot see how they will rule any other way than forbidding any authority from preventing their marriage.

    The government should not be denying US Citizens their liberties. this country was founded on liberty.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    67,619
    Thanks Received:
    7,821
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +18,214
    No real reason for the court to deal with this. If another appeals court rules differently or there is an interstate issue then they will.
     
  7. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    41,543
    Thanks Received:
    8,933
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +23,869
    Incorrect. Citizens’ civil rights are not subject to popular vote. See: West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943).

    Correct. Of course the issue can be ended and court battles avoided altogether if states simply followed the 14th Amendment mandate ensuring all citizens have equal access to the law.
     
  8. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    Just like abortion went away after the Supreme Court ruled on that issue, or discrimination went away when they ruled on that. You really should get your head out of your ass and look at the real world.
     
  9. SniperFire
    Offline

    SniperFire Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2012
    Messages:
    13,627
    Thanks Received:
    1,219
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Inside Your Head
    Ratings:
    +1,223
    Think about what you just said.

    Does a man have the 'liberty' to marry his 6 sisters?

    How about to marry 3,284 women?
     
  10. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    67,619
    Thanks Received:
    7,821
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +18,214
    Once you can define marriage any way you want for tax and political gain then the word loses all meaning. Maybe 3 people can marry 4 others. Perhaps Jose the illegal can marry a "sister" city in Oregon to become a US citizen.
    It makes a farce of the concept of marriage. Which is the real goal of the fag lobby.
     

Share This Page