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

[nodoginnafight]

The single judge in Alabama who is trying to stand in the way of gay marriage (Roy S. Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court - the same guy who defied a federal order to remove the 10 Commandments) is doing his best George Wallace impersonation. He's "standing in the door of the school" to deny equal rights.

Ironic that OP would blame everyone else for "judicial activism" but this single judge gets a pass????

Gay marriage is accepted in what ... about 35 states now?

It's not going away. No one is going to be able to squeeze that toothpaste back into the tube.

The only question that remains is how many people are going to get hurt by those who want to "take their stand" denying equal rights to gays.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

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

You might need to flush out you geriatric homoeroticism a bit before submitting it to literotica, but it's certainly a nice start.

 

[g5000]

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.

Then the justices who have officiated opposite sex marriages should recuse themselves, too.

 

[g5000]

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

You might need to flush out you geriatric homoeroticism a bit before submitting it to literotica, but it's certainly a nice start.

The same sex marriage opponents have an obsession with man-on-man butt sex. They are so busy fantasizing about gay sex they can't see this issue is about the government cash and prizes given to married couples.

 

[g5000]

All the Supremes did was refuse to stay a lower court's ruling. Nothing more.

They do that all. The. Time.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

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.

Then the justices who have officiated opposite sex marriages should recuse themselves, too.

Yeah, it's idiotic. These guys know how they are going to rule. They've had years to think about. He seems to think they live in a vacuum but unlike him, they live in the real world, most of the time.

 

[g5000]

The Supreme Court already has ruled on inheritance taxes for gay couples. They are not coming into this matter cold.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

The same sex marriage opponents have an obsession with man-on-man butt sex. They are so busy fantasizing about gay sex they can't see this issue is about the government cash and prizes given to married couples.

"Meet me in my chamber", Alito whispered suggestively, his hand brushing aside the bottle of KY, knocking it to the floor"

"Chamber? I know what chamber YOU'RE talking about" Thomas replied as he flushed with excitement.

"It's a slippery slope, Clarence, and I know how you get when you rule on one" Alito purred as he bent over to retrieve the fallen lube.

"Oh, don't you know, it baby, don't you know it!" Thomas gasped, "but hey, give me a few minutes until the viagra kicks in".........

 

[nodoginnafight]

@ Dogmaphobe: That's one of the creepiest posts I've ever seen on these boards (and THAT is saying something).

 

[Silhouette]

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

You're not quite grasping the focus of this thread. Yes, if you want to debate gay marriage you can all day long on any of the number of other threads on them. And of course it's fair game here too, to a degree. . But this thread is about how the Court "tipping it's hand" is illegal use of federal procedure. Thomas & Scalia at least read their job application during their interview..

 

[nodoginnafight]

Wonder if Roy Moore read his job description?

 

[bodecea]

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..

Have we not been telling you for quite a while that the old superstitious days were going away?

 

[bodecea]

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

Only if you can watch......right?

 

[bodecea]

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.

If they do, then any judge who has officiated in an opposite sex marriage should also recluse themself.

 

[bodecea]

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.

How so? In the same way that officiating at opposite sex marriages demonstrates a bias towards the subject?

 

[bodecea]

The same sex marriage opponents have an obsession with man-on-man butt sex. They are so busy fantasizing about gay sex they can't see this issue is about the government cash and prizes given to married couples.

"Meet me in my chamber", Alito whispered suggestively, his hand brushing aside the bottle of KY, knocking it to the floor"

"Chamber? I know what chamber YOU'RE talking about" Thomas replied as he flushed with excitement.

"It's a slippery slope, Clarence, and I know how you get when you rule on one" Alito purred as he bent over to retrieve the fallen lube.

"Oh, don't you know, it baby, don't you know it!" Thomas gasped, "but hey, give me a few minutes until the viagra kicks in".........

OMIGOD!!!!!

 

[Skylar]

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

You're not quite grasping the focus of this thread. Yes, if you want to debate gay marriage you can all day long on any of the number of other threads on them. And of course it's fair game here too, to a degree. . But this thread is about how the Court "tipping it's hand" is illegal use of federal procedure.

Nope. A stay is granted when there is a plausible chance that the plaintiff requesting the stay will win in court. There is no such plausible chance in the case of Alabama's gay marriage ban. Ergo, there is no stay.

That's the way the law works and is supposed to work.

 

[Silhouette]

..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..

Have we not been telling you for quite a while that the old superstitious days were going away?

Having a problem with the US Supreme Court indicating to the public that it has made a shadow-Decision without public airing or input has nothing to do with superstition. It's the highest perversion of that federal Office which his held more stringently than any other court to an appearance of impartiality.

Are you daft, missing the point of this thread?

 

[Silhouette]

You're not quite grasping the focus of this thread. Yes, if you want to debate gay marriage you can all day long on any of the number of other threads on them. And of course it's fair game here too, to a degree. . But this thread is about how the Court "tipping it's hand" is illegal use of federal procedure.

Nope. A stay is granted when there is a plausible chance that the plaintiff requesting the stay will win in court. There is no such plausible chance in the case of Alabama's gay marriage ban. Ergo, there is no stay.

That's the way the law works and is supposed to work.

No, read what Thomas and Scalia wrote. The status quo after Windsor was that states get to define marriage. "How it works" is that the Courts preserve the status quo until a final hearing is Heard.

Plus, the Prince's Trust survey has not passed by the ears of the Justices; and yet it's out there. There is a more compelling argument for preserving the status quo than not.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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

You might need to flush out you geriatric homoeroticism a bit before submitting it to literotica, but it's certainly a nice start.

Your Freudian slip of saying 'flush out' instead of 'flesh out' is a classic.