Discussion for article #228581
The Supreme Court conservatives may have been hoping for a split.
2 Likes
There is no split. The pro-gay marriage side has all the existing circuit decisions on its side. Kennedy is giving a the anti-gay marriage side a chance to come up with something new.
14 Likes
Kennedy is giving a the anti-gay marriage side a chance to come up with something new.
Agreed. Kennedy is trying to avoid the appearance of the Supremes not doing due diligence on a decisive issue. He’s saying, in effect, “what else you got?”
19 Likes
Let’s see…Butch the Otter (Driver Under the Influence & serial philanderer) needs to retain his phony-baloney job next month. Family Values and past record will be a long-shot so better to assault teh geys and get the mouth-breathers out to place a check next to the “R” box. Plus, SC Justice K & Butch share the mackerel-snapping persuasion.
Feeling suicidal? Vote Republican.
6 Likes
Kennedy is an on-going disappointment.
8 Likes
Kennedy is mostly libertarian, as many of his opinions show. He might want to force the SCOTUS to intervene. Libertarians usually are government minimalist, so following that view, he might not want government telling anyone who can can marry whom.
Could be quite simple. The Idaho case was already in the pipeline and Kennedy might want all the t’s crossed and i’s dotted.
1 Like
Sorry Idaho. You can’t stop this. The Rightie Bigots and Hate Filled Cons will, just as they did with slavery for example, go down fighting and be dragged kicking and screaming toward reality…which they will still try to reject.
So, you ‘fiscally conservative’ loons, keep spending monies, time and resources on your lost cause and avoiding addressing issues that could elevate this country’s future for all. The sooner you and your vile cult-of-a-political-party are thrown on the ash heap of history, the better.
3 Likes
This is weird. The court settled the debate the other day–it’s not going to overrule decisions by so many courts of appeal, one of which is the 9th Circuit. Indeed, the court’s decision not to hear the cases the other day was a broad hint to the Sixth and Fifth Circuits to get in line. So this decision doesn’t make sense. Especially as Kennedy must have voted against granting cert in the cases where cert was denied this week.
2 Likes
Ongoing disappointment? You had high hopes for him?
1 Like
Kennedy, who has jurisdiction over emergency appeals to rulings at the 9th Circuit, ordered that the lawyers for the same-sex couples suing to ax the ban respond to Idaho’s appeal by Thursday, Oct. 9 by 5 p.m.
Sigh. No.
-
The state applied to the Supreme Court for a stay–an order putting another order or judgment on hold–while the state decides whether to petition the Supreme Court for certiorari.
-
Kennedy did not order the other side to “respond to Idaho’s appeal.” First, there is no right of appeal in this case, only the right to petition for certiorari (i.e. request that the Supremes make this one of the 250 odd cases out of 7,000 they consider, in their sole discretion.) And, second, there is no petition for certiorari yet.
-
What Kennedy did do is put into place a brief emergency stay to preserve the status quo and ordered the other side to respond, not on the merits, but, rather to the state’s request for a longer-term that would last until the later of the expiration of the state’s deadline to petition for cert, the Supreme Court’s entry of an order denying the petition, or, if granted, the entry of a ruling on the merits. The question being briefed is whether the state will somehow suffer irreparable harm if gay people are allowed to marry in the interim and how that harm balances against the harm to the people who aren’t allowed to get married. That’s actually a fairly weighty question, but its not the underlying issue of the constitutionality of bans.
For those who don’t speak legal, it means this is all just procedural, non-substantive stuff. It’s a big deal for the people who want to get married, but not for the larger debate.
25 Likes
No.
But I had some idea he might be vaguely reasonable given the Court’s not granting certiorari to the appeals.
This is crazy. Let them all get married if they want to!!! Again we look like fools to the world.
Still, I’d say, WHAT THE FUCK.
A BIg WIN for CenTEr RIght AmerICA whO wANTs TO PerSERve THEiR MARRiages IN a WAY theY caNNOt if GAYs get THE MArry. True FActs!!! SearcH it ON the GOOGle. IF Gay GEts the MARRY NOT onLY dOEs IT UPset GOD, but IT aLSO IMPOses AccePTAnce!!!1!!!1!!!one!11!!!
7 Likes
Another reason to decry Kennedy’s action—it gives idiots like RRRRRRReince Preibus a platform to say stupid shit.
2 Likes
Kennedy screws up Idaho—even if only temporarily—while another federal judge lifts his stay in West Virginia.
1 Like
This is a desperate Hail Mary from the State of Idaho. They are arguing that because the 9th ruled with a higher “strict scrutiny” threshold than the other appellate courts, it invalidates the 9th’s ruling. Never mind the other appellate courts have all come to the same conclusion that the 9th did with the lower threshold for state bans to be valid.
It also tosses in a vanity plea in trying to argue that it should be up to the SCOTUS to invalidate Idaho’s ban, not the 9th circuit and that they need to halt this to protect the SCOTUS’s prerogative to decide the matter.
2 Likes
Rogue Justice…
1 Like