Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality

[Webster]

Gay marriage is now legal in 35 states, and counting.

Spoiler

...to borrow Nebulous Biden's infamous quote, this is a big f'n deal...

By refusing to hear appeals in cases brought by the states of Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, Oklahoma and Utah, the Supreme Court has not only made gay marriage effectively legal in those states, but also in six more: North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, Colorado, Kansas and Wyoming.

What happened was that Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, Oklahoma and Utah recently saw their gay marriage bans struck down by federal courts.

The states then lost their appeals in the federal appellate courts for their regions.

And then, by the Supreme Court today refusing to hear those appeals, the decisions of the appellate courts stand, and those opinions affect every state in the regions they cover.

Thus, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, Colorado, Kansas and Wyoming are affected as well. This will bring to 30 the total number of states in which gays can wed.

Interestingly, the NYT does not mention the additional six states. Freedom to Marry, the resident expert on gay marriage, however does.

While many gay rights advocates had hoped the court would hear at least one appeal, and use it to legalize gay marriage nationwide, that wasn’t the Supreme Court’s game plan. As I’ve indicated before, I think the court’s pro-gay-marriage majority in US v. Windsor intended gay marriage to come upon the land on cat feet. Slowly. Quietly. State by state. And not all at once.

The idea: to make gay marriage inevitable and boring, so as to ultimately avoid another Roe v. Wade -type decision, that would not only threaten the decision itself, but also the court’s credibility.(AmericaBlog)

Thoughts?

 

[DrLeftover]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

The Court is a bunch of chickenshits.

This is the one issue that is totally radioactive and no matter which way they ruled there would be political hell to pay.

Our Dear Leader and the democrats are all Pro-Gay all the time. The republicans have pretty much lined up on the other side. And there IS no middle ground for a nice safe lukewarm ruling that would give both sides a little, take a little away, and yet leave some wiggle room for both.

The only safe play for them is to sit it out.

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

30 states already? I call that progress.

Take that bigots. ...make them a damn wedding cake too, bakery owners.

 

[Dee]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

Just, YAYYY! Finally. This should have been legal from the start, but apparently human beings are very much okay with holding back other human beings who are different from them, which is sick and wrong. I'm glad the Supreme Court is actually doing something good for the people of this country because really...who is it hurting to allow same-sex couples the same benefits as married straight couples?

 

[Webster]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

The Court is a bunch of chickenshits.

How are they so, Doc?
I mean, all the Court did was decline to review appellate decisions...that's not a chickenshit decision. Or do they need to hear from you first, Doc, before acting?

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

What great news! Government power has just grown with more stealing of other peoples money through marriage!

 

[Webster]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

What great news! Government power has just grown with more stealing of other peoples money through marriage!

*shakes head in disbelief* Wow...talk about a one-track, Galt's Gulch mind; that ain't even worth dignifying with a response.

 

[Jazzy]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

Video: Colbert Is Pumped Up On A New Supreme Court Session

Thoughts?

 

[Webster]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

Video: Colbert Is Pumped Up On A New Supreme Court Session

Thoughts?

Best line in the video, Jazzy:

"It's like the start of the football season, except unlike the NFL, these players actually go to court."

That said, I still think the Roberts Court did the right thing in declining to hear the appellate cases before them; my own thought is that Chief Justice Roberts would rather slow-walk his way through an issue such as marriage equality and see what happens instead of making one huge decision. In other words, the Court made the right decision yesterday.

 

[DrLeftover]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

The Court is a bunch of chickenshits.

How are they so, Doc?
I mean, all the Court did was decline to review appellate decisions...that's not a chickenshit decision. Or do they need to hear from you first, Doc, before acting?

No, they don't. However, by refusing to hear the case and having to decide for or against either side, they voted to stay home and not rule.

It is a non-decision.

 

[Webster]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

The Court is a bunch of chickenshits.

How are they so, Doc?
I mean, all the Court did was decline to review appellate decisions...that's not a chickenshit decision. Or do they need to hear from you first, Doc, before acting?

No, they don't. However, by refusing to hear the case and having to decide for and against either side, they voted to stay home and not rule.

That's still making a decision one way or the other, Doc. Odds are, given the lack of a circuit split on the issue at present, they decided to let the appellate rulings stand as precedent in the applicable federal circuits (namely the 4th & 10th Circuits). Now, should there be a circuit decision in the opposite decision, they'll most likely take up the issue once and for all, but for now, the High Court did the right thing.

And that, my good friend, is never a - to use your words - a chickenshit decision to make.

 

[Webster]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

Next thing you know, we'll be granting pedophiles rights to have sex with children.

Well, it didn't take long for someone to invoke Godwin's Law - or one of its' American cousins - in the ongoing debate over marriage equality. That said, feel free to bash your head in on the various fallacies that have been invoked against marriage equality. Quoting Skeptoid:

This uses the slippery slope fallacy to wrongly insinuate that if we do X, then naturally, Y and Z will follow. That is to say that if people of the same gender are allowed to marry, then we’ll have to allow anyone to marry anyone or anything, including children, multiple partners, siblings, inanimate objects, animals or the dead.

However, there is no reason to think any of this will actually happen, for numerous reasons, some legal and some personal. For one thing, close to a dozen countries already permit same-sex marriage, and none have seen spikes in any of these behaviors. They are cultural taboos, and will remain so, no matter what.

The arguments against marriage to children, goats, corpses, pieces of fruit, etc., are simple: none of them can legally give their consent. Without consent between both parties, a marriage doesn’t exist and has no legal standing.

The prohibition against incest is also sensible. The state and society have a vested interest in not permitting inbreeding because of the potential for malformed children. Whether relatives who either can’t or don’t intend to have children should be allowed to marry is a potentially interesting question from a civil liberties standpoint, but even if incest was legal, (which absolutely nobody is talking about) it’s doubtful that there would be a sudden onslaught of siblings and cousins desperate to marry.

As for legalized group marriage, one could again argue that the state has no business barring activities between consenting adults, even if there are more than two, but polygamy has not been protected by the US Constitution since 1878, and until someone challenges that ruling, it’s essentially a dead issue – and a non sequitur, as nobody is demanding the right to a group marriage.

To quote Pres. Obama from the 2012 presidential debates: Please proceed, Smooth.

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

Yeah I never understood why people come up with that type of logic. It makes absolutely no sense and its not even a good argument. It doesn't help defend your stance on the matter at all. If you really think allowing two consenting adults a right to get married will lead into whatever wacky and grotesque thing you can come up with, then you're not living in reality.

 

[Webster]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

You can add five more states to the list of those where marriage equality is now the law of the land...

BOISE, Idaho (AP) — A federal appeals court declared gay marriage legal in Idaho and Nevada on Tuesday and followed the ruling a few hours later with a mandate allowing the Idaho marriages to start immediately.

The order, issued Tuesday evening, means that same-sex couples in Idaho won't have to wait for the standard seven-day time span for the ruling to take effect.

"This is a super sweet victory," said Sue Latta, who along with Traci Ehlers sued Idaho last year to compel the state to recognize their 2008 marriage in California. Three other couples also joined the lawsuit to invalidate Idaho's same-sex marriage ban.

"Taxes are easier, real estate is easier, parenting is easier, end-of-life planning is easier," Latta said.

The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure typically provide the seven-day waiting period to give the losing side a chance to appeal.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that gay couples' equal protection rights were violated by the bans in both states. But in Nevada a U.S. District Court judge still must issue a formal injunction overturning the state's gay marriage ban.

Logan Seven, 54, a limousine driver for Chapelle de l'amour wedding chapel in downtown Las Vegas, said he always wanted to get married on a beach, barefoot and in a white tuxedo.

"Trying to find the right man is the hard part," he said Tuesday after his boss told him about the gay marriage ruling.

The Chicago native said he was surprised when he moved to Las Vegas and learned that the town that touts itself as a marriage capital didn't allow gay marriages. "It's a no-brainer," Seven said. "Love is love."

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval and state Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto issued a joint statement saying it could be two weeks before a final order is issued by a U.S. District Court judge in Nevada. They said county clerks and district attorneys should be making plans to handle marriage licenses.

Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote for a unanimous three-judge panel that laws that treat people differently based on sexual orientation are unconstitutional unless there is a compelling government interest. He wrote that neither Idaho nor Nevada offered any legitimate reasons to discriminate against gay couples.

"Idaho and Nevada's marriage laws, by preventing same-sex couples from marrying and refusing to recognize same-sex marriages celebrated elsewhere, impose profound legal, financial, social and psychic harms on numerous citizens of those states," Reinhardt wrote.

He rejected the argument that same-sex marriages will devalue traditional marriage, leading to more out-of-wedlock births.

"This proposition reflects a crass and callous view of parental love and the parental bond that is not worthy of response," Reinhardt wrote. "We reject it out of hand."

Technically, the court upheld a trial judge's ruling striking down Idaho's ban and reversed a lower-court ruling upholding Nevada's ban.

Reinhardt ordered a "prompt issuance" of a lower court's order to let same-sex couples wed In Nevada.

"We are absolutely delighted that wedding bells will finally be ringing for same-sex couples in Nevada," said Tara Borelli, the lawyer who argued the Nevada case for Lambda Legal.

Monte Neil Stewart, the Idaho-based attorney who argued the case for Nevada on behalf of the Coalition for the Protection of Marriage, declined to say whether he'll challenge the order for the prompt start to same-sex marriages.

State and federal court judges have been striking down bans at a rapid rate since a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year.

On Monday, the nation's top court unexpectedly rejected appeals from five states seeking to preserve their bans. The decision cleared the way for a dramatic expansion of gay marriage in the United States and might have signaled that it's only a matter of time before same-sex couples can marry in all 50 states.

The appeals court panel did not rule on a similar case in Hawaii, which legalized gay marriage in December. Hawaii's governor had asked the court to toss out a lawsuit challenging the state's ban and an appeal to the 9th Circuit filed before Hawaii lawmakers legalized same-sex marriage.

All three judges on the panel were appointed by Democratic presidents. President Bill Clinton appointed Judges Marsha Berzon and Ronald Gould. President Jimmy Carter appointed Reinhardt.

The court also has jurisdiction in three other states that still have marriage bans in place: Alaska, Arizona and Montana. Lawsuits challenging bans in those states are still pending in lower courts and have not reached the 9th Circuit.(Huffington Post)

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

It'll be 50 states soon enough, web. Only a matter of time. I bet 100 years from now people will look back and laugh at how this was even a debate topic.

 

[Dee]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

It'll be 50 states soon enough, web. Only a matter of time. I bet 100 years from now people will look back and laugh at how this was even a debate topic.

I hope that's the case. It's tragic how simple-minded, ignorant, and downright prejudice people can still be. Not saying they can't have their opinions about how other people live their lives, but to make it illegal for certain folks to love is just absolutely ridiculous.

 

[+paradox]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

The Court is a bunch of chickenshits.

This is the one issue that is totally radioactive and no matter which way they ruled there would be political hell to pay.

Our Dear Leader and the democrats are all Pro-Gay all the time. The republicans have pretty much lined up on the other side. And there IS no middle ground for a nice safe lukewarm ruling that would give both sides a little, take a little away, and yet leave some wiggle room for both.

The only safe play for them is to sit it out.

What great news! Government power has just grown with more stealing of other peoples money through marriage!

Next thing you know, we'll be granting pedophiles rights to have sex with children.

__________________________________________________

Next thing you know, we'll be granting pedophiles rights to have sex with children.

Well, it didn't take long for someone to invoke Godwin's Law - or one of its' American cousins - in the ongoing debate over marriage equality. That said, feel free to bash your head in on the various fallacies that have been invoked against marriage equality. Quoting Skeptoid:

This uses the slippery slope fallacy to wrongly insinuate that if we do X, then naturally, Y and Z will follow. That is to say that if people of the same gender are allowed to marry, then we’ll have to allow anyone to marry anyone or anything, including children, multiple partners, siblings, inanimate objects, animals or the dead.

However, there is no reason to think any of this will actually happen, for numerous reasons, some legal and some personal. For one thing, close to a dozen countries already permit same-sex marriage, and none have seen spikes in any of these behaviors. They are cultural taboos, and will remain so, no matter what.

The arguments against marriage to children, goats, corpses, pieces of fruit, etc., are simple: none of them can legally give their consent. Without consent between both parties, a marriage doesn’t exist and has no legal standing.

The prohibition against incest is also sensible. The state and society have a vested interest in not permitting inbreeding because of the potential for malformed children. Whether relatives who either can’t or don’t intend to have children should be allowed to marry is a potentially interesting question from a civil liberties standpoint, but even if incest was legal, (which absolutely nobody is talking about) it’s doubtful that there would be a sudden onslaught of siblings and cousins desperate to marry.

As for legalized group marriage, one could again argue that the state has no business barring activities between consenting adults, even if there are more than two, but polygamy has not been protected by the US Constitution since 1878, and until someone challenges that ruling, it’s essentially a dead issue – and a non sequitur, as nobody is demanding the right to a group marriage.

To quote Pres. Obama from the 2012 presidential debates: Please proceed, Smooth.

and a...

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

What great news! Government power has just grown with more stealing of other peoples money through marriage!

*shakes head in disbelief* Wow...talk about a one-track, Galt's Gulch mind; that ain't even worth dignifying with a response.

Truth hurts. This fight has nothing to do with marriage since anyone at any time can get married. Its about money and all the benefits that come with other peoples money. Most states had already given the same rights to gay couples like visiting the hospital and being able to see there loved ones.

The only reason government is involved in marriage is for power over the people to promise goodies and freebies. If government was not involved in marriage all this back and forth hate would not be a issue. Who could get married would not be a issue.

 

[+paradox]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

What great news! Government power has just grown with more stealing of other peoples money through marriage!

*shakes head in disbelief* Wow...talk about a one-track, Galt's Gulch mind; that ain't even worth dignifying with a response.

Truth hurts. This fight has nothing to do with marriage since anyone at any time can get married. Its about money and all the benefits that come with other peoples money. Most states had already given the same rights to gay couples like visiting the hospital and being able to see there loved ones.

The only reason government is involved in marriage is for power over the people to promise goodies and freebies. If government was not involved in marriage all this back and forth hate would not be a issue. Who could get married would not be a issue.

are you benefiting by being married?

 

[DrLeftover]

RE: Supreme Court Extends Marriage Equality In 11 More States

But the Court missed a chance to perhaps issue a ruling that would work nationwide.

Right now, Homosexual Marriage is still illegal in almost half the states.