Justices Indicate Shadow-Bias: Gay Marriage Question Erodes Last Bastion of Impariality?

[Silhouette]

Justices Thomas and Scalia author a scathing dissent to the denial of a stay in Alabama.

Here's the link to Thomas' words, with Scalia getting his back. https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1658000/thomasdissent.pdf

You know, his/their logic is flawless. The Court has no business deciding the merits of a case without hearing it first. And the last opinion the Court gave the public on the question of who gets to decide on gay marraige was reiterated 56 times in Windsor "the states do, now and always since the founding of the country"...

The real, and I feel impeachable danger that these rogue Justices are stepping our country into is that the nation will get the idea that there really isn't justice. That there really isn't a system of laws and protocols that will protect the Union that they can rely on. If the Justices get to hold what is essentially a shadow kangaroo court on the question of gay marriage, what topic will they do so on next?

LGBTs shouldn't be celebrating this dangerous precedent. Because if Congress does impeach any Justice so engaged illegally and irreverently for the position they hold as the last bastion of appeal to IMPARTIAL justice, they may be replaced by the next GOP administration/Congress by a panel of conservative Justices who then might find that a reversal of undue process is in order..

This is dangerous territory the Court is treading on. And Thomas' & Scalia's anger is well founded...

..yet another Federal District Judge casts aside state laws without making any effort to preserve the status quo pending the Court’s resolution of a constitutional question it left open in United States v. Windsor, 570 U. S. ___ (2013) (slip op., at 25–26). This acquiescence may well be seen as a signal of the Court’s intended resolution of that question. This is not the proper way to discharge our Article III responsibilities...Today’s decision represents yet another example of this Court’s increasingly cavalier attitude toward the States.... In this case, the Court refuses even to grant a temporary stay when it will resolve the issue at hand in several months....I respectfully dissent from the denial of this application. I would have shown the people of Alabama the respect they deserve and preserved the status quo while the Court resolves this important constitutional question.

That bit in bold is grounds for impeachment. Those rogue Justices better keep a very sharp eye on the next election cycle..The separation and limitations of powers in our country are the ONLY thing that sets us apart from a dictatorship.

No matter what your position on gay marriage becoming a federal mandate instead of the lifestyle being weighed by the separate states as appropriate to be parents of the most important people in marriage (children), you should be concerned about the fact that our last chance at impartial American justice is deciding cases before they are heard..

 

[PaintMyHouse]

It's a done deal Sil. Give it up. The US is leaving you in the past, where you belong.

 

[OKTexas]

It's a done deal Sil. Give it up. The US is leaving you in the past, where you belong.

You seem to be assuming facts not yet in evidence. But hey, we expect nothing less from you.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I hope all the judges fuck each other in their asses.

 

[Skylar]

It's a done deal Sil. Give it up. The US is leaving you in the past, where you belong.

You seem to be assuming facts not yet in evidence. But hey, we expect nothing less from you.

He's simply paraphrasing Justice Scalia:

In my opinion, however, the view that this Court will take of state prohibition of same-sex marriage is indicated beyond mistaking by today’s opinion. As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by “ ‘bare . . . desire to harm’ ” couples in same-sex marriages. Supra, at 18. How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.

Justice Scalia in dissent of Windsor v. US

Note the words 'inevitable' and 'beyond mistaking'.

 

[OKTexas]

It's a done deal Sil. Give it up. The US is leaving you in the past, where you belong.

You seem to be assuming facts not yet in evidence. But hey, we expect nothing less from you.

He's simply paraphrasing Justice Scalia:

In my opinion, however, the view that this Court will take of state prohibition of same-sex marriage is indicated beyond mistaking by today’s opinion. As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by “ ‘bare . . . desire to harm’ ” couples in same-sex marriages. Supra, at 18. How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.

Justice Scalia in dissent of Windsor v. US

Note the words 'inevitable' and 'beyond mistaking'.

We'll see around June.

 

[Skylar]

It's a done deal Sil. Give it up. The US is leaving you in the past, where you belong.

You seem to be assuming facts not yet in evidence. But hey, we expect nothing less from you.

He's simply paraphrasing Justice Scalia:

In my opinion, however, the view that this Court will take of state prohibition of same-sex marriage is indicated beyond mistaking by today’s opinion. As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by “ ‘bare . . . desire to harm’ ” couples in same-sex marriages. Supra, at 18. How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.

Justice Scalia in dissent of Windsor v. US

Note the words 'inevitable' and 'beyond mistaking'.

We'll see around June.

Say it with me;

....."inevitable".

 

[paperview]

It's a done deal Sil. Give it up. The US is leaving you in the past, where you belong.

You seem to be assuming facts not yet in evidence. But hey, we expect nothing less from you.

He's simply paraphrasing Justice Scalia:

In my opinion, however, the view that this Court will take of state prohibition of same-sex marriage is indicated beyond mistaking by today’s opinion. As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by “ ‘bare . . . desire to harm’ ” couples in same-sex marriages. Supra, at 18. How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.

Justice Scalia in dissent of Windsor v. US

Note the words 'inevitable' and 'beyond mistaking'.

We'll see around June.

We will. SCOTUS tipped their hand yesterday.
Gonna happen.

 

[OKTexas]

It's a done deal Sil. Give it up. The US is leaving you in the past, where you belong.

You seem to be assuming facts not yet in evidence. But hey, we expect nothing less from you.

He's simply paraphrasing Justice Scalia:

In my opinion, however, the view that this Court will take of state prohibition of same-sex marriage is indicated beyond mistaking by today’s opinion. As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by “ ‘bare . . . desire to harm’ ” couples in same-sex marriages. Supra, at 18. How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.

Justice Scalia in dissent of Windsor v. US

Note the words 'inevitable' and 'beyond mistaking'.

We'll see around June.

Say it with me;

....."inevitable".

Only one thing that is inevitable, death. If it lives death will overtake it.

 

[Skylar]

It's a done deal Sil. Give it up. The US is leaving you in the past, where you belong.

You seem to be assuming facts not yet in evidence. But hey, we expect nothing less from you.

He's simply paraphrasing Justice Scalia:

In my opinion, however, the view that this Court will take of state prohibition of same-sex marriage is indicated beyond mistaking by today’s opinion. As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by “ ‘bare . . . desire to harm’ ” couples in same-sex marriages. Supra, at 18. How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.

Justice Scalia in dissent of Windsor v. US

Note the words 'inevitable' and 'beyond mistaking'.

We'll see around June.

We will. SCOTUS tipped their hand yesterday.
Gonna happen.

They tipped their hand again yesterday. This is the 6th time they've denied cert for a lower court ruling that overturned gay marriage bans.

 

[Skylar]

It's a done deal Sil. Give it up. The US is leaving you in the past, where you belong.

You seem to be assuming facts not yet in evidence. But hey, we expect nothing less from you.

He's simply paraphrasing Justice Scalia:

In my opinion, however, the view that this Court will take of state prohibition of same-sex marriage is indicated beyond mistaking by today’s opinion. As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by “ ‘bare . . . desire to harm’ ” couples in same-sex marriages. Supra, at 18. How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.

Justice Scalia in dissent of Windsor v. US

Note the words 'inevitable' and 'beyond mistaking'.

We'll see around June.

Say it with me;

....."inevitable".

Only one thing that is inevitable, death. If it lives death will overtake it.

Laughing....so you know better than Justice Scalia, huh? Good luck with that.

 

[Statistikhengst]

The OP title:

Justices Indicate Shadow-Bias: Gay Marriage Question Erodes Last Bastion of Impariality?

"Impariality"??

 

[OKTexas]

You seem to be assuming facts not yet in evidence. But hey, we expect nothing less from you.

He's simply paraphrasing Justice Scalia:

In my opinion, however, the view that this Court will take of state prohibition of same-sex marriage is indicated beyond mistaking by today’s opinion. As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by “ ‘bare . . . desire to harm’ ” couples in same-sex marriages. Supra, at 18. How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.

Justice Scalia in dissent of Windsor v. US

Note the words 'inevitable' and 'beyond mistaking'.

We'll see around June.

Say it with me;

....."inevitable".

Only one thing that is inevitable, death. If it lives death will overtake it.

Laughing....so you know better than Justice Scalia, huh? Good luck with that.

Two justices should recuse themselves because they have officiated same sex marriages, if they do the proper thing, I'm not sure you will like the resulting 4-3 decision.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

He's simply paraphrasing Justice Scalia:

Note the words 'inevitable' and 'beyond mistaking'.

We'll see around June.

Say it with me;

....."inevitable".

Only one thing that is inevitable, death. If it lives death will overtake it.

Laughing....so you know better than Justice Scalia, huh? Good luck with that.

Two justices should recuse themselves because they have officiated same sex marriages, if they do the proper thing, I'm not sure you will like the resulting 4-3 decision.

What would the conflict of interest be?

 

[OKTexas]

We'll see around June.

Say it with me;

....."inevitable".

Only one thing that is inevitable, death. If it lives death will overtake it.

Laughing....so you know better than Justice Scalia, huh? Good luck with that.

Two justices should recuse themselves because they have officiated same sex marriages, if they do the proper thing, I'm not sure you will like the resulting 4-3 decision.

What would the conflict of interest be?

Doc your not that dense, by officiating same sex marriages they have demonstrated a bias toward the subject. Even an appearance of bias is enough to justify them recusing themselves but we all know the bias is real.

 

[Skylar]

Say it with me;

....."inevitable".

Only one thing that is inevitable, death. If it lives death will overtake it.

Laughing....so you know better than Justice Scalia, huh? Good luck with that.

Two justices should recuse themselves because they have officiated same sex marriages, if they do the proper thing, I'm not sure you will like the resulting 4-3 decision.

What would the conflict of interest be?

Doc your not that dense, by officiating same sex marriages they have demonstrated a bias toward the subject. Even an appearance of bias is enough to justify them recusing themselves but we all know the bias is real.

Nonsense. Both instances of officiating were in States or Districts that had chosen to allow same sex marriage through action of the legislature. Not States that had had their marriage laws overruled by the federal judiciary. Making even the possibility of a conflict of interest impossible.

They didn't officiate a 'same sex marriage' in either instance. They officiated a marriage. As the laws under which they officiated makes no distinction.

 

[rightwinger]

If they supported the stay in Alabama....wouldn't they be tipping their hand for the conservatives?

 

[Skylar]

If they supported the stay in Alabama....wouldn't they be tipping their hand for the conservatives?

Not necessarily. That could just be a legal freeze while the issue was being resolved. But by denying a stay, the court signaled that it didn't recognize that there was a plausible chance of the plaintiff's sucess in court necessary to justify a stay.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

It's a done deal Sil. Give it up. The US is leaving you in the past, where you belong.

You seem to be assuming facts not yet in evidence. But hey, we expect nothing less from you.

Dude, it's over, wake up. They couldn't be more obvious. Your attitude is simply childish. Case after case they've let it go. If you can't read what's written on the wall when it's that clear no one can help you. That horn in the distance is a train, so get off the damn tracks. You don't have to wait until it hits you just to be sure.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

He's simply paraphrasing Justice Scalia:

Note the words 'inevitable' and 'beyond mistaking'.

We'll see around June.

Say it with me;

....."inevitable".

Only one thing that is inevitable, death. If it lives death will overtake it.

Laughing....so you know better than Justice Scalia, huh? Good luck with that.

Two justices should recuse themselves because they have officiated same sex marriages, if they do the proper thing, I'm not sure you will like the resulting 4-3 decision.

That's just dumb, and unnecessary. Their minds were made up before it was even legal, so was mine.