Discussion for article #228465
Okay, this is good.
Waiting for another shoe to drop though. I’m sure Roberts’ court will find another way to shit on the US, with the help from Alito, Scalia and quiet Thomas.
2 Likes
TPM really needs a new picture to use for gay marriage articles.
5 Likes
If they were going to shit on us, wouldn’t they have done it now?
4 Likes
Since the SC refused to jump over the broom on these cases, look for the right wing to bring out the shotgun.
1 Like
Naw…they will not flip the lower courts on this. It is clearly an Equal Protection matter and has been for centuries The tide is rising and the court does not want to be on the wrong side of history.
3 Likes
Since a marriage in one state means a couple is married in all other states, this means that marriage equality will soon be valid throughout the US. Otherwise, a state WITH marriage equality could pass a law saying that straight marriages from other states (that do not recognize gay marriages) could be invalid in their state. So, any time you move from one state to another, you have to get married all over again. Even the current SCOTUS wouldn’t allow that.
4 Likes
According to the NYT:
“The move was a major surprise and suggests that the justices are not going to intercede in the wave of decisions in favor of same-sex marriage at least until a federal appeals court upholds a state ban.”
2 Likes
Exactly, and they don’t have the votes on the court to do anything about it anyway. This was the easiest way to do it without being forced to go on record. It’s but a matter of time before gay marriage is legal in every state. It’s time to rejoice.
2 Likes
Am I the only one who’s disappointed by this? Of course the court is not going to rule that these bans are constitutional, the discrimination and inequality are obvious, and even the justices opposed to it in concept know they wouldn’t have much a constitutional leg to stand on in trying to keep them in place. But by refusing to actually take a case and thereby overturn ALL such bans the court has merely perpetuated the existing messy patchwork of laws whose very chaotic nature is simply more blatant discrimination against same-sex couples, especially now that the federal government is recognizing these marriages. Sure they are, but only for those from a state where it’s allowed, and many that do allow it won’t do so for residents of other states! It’s is unequal and discriminatory in the extreme.
To me, it’s inexcusable that the court is leaving stand this ugly, chaotic, discriminatory mess. They need to rule on the question definitively and not simply kick the can down the road as they’ve done today, leaving same-sex couples to suffer with this chaos and second-class treatment for who knows how many more years.
4 Likes
The way I look at it is the way I look at any “positive” ruling from the Roberts court: it could have been worse.
2 Likes
What surprises me with this is that it only takes four justices to grant cert. I can see Kennedy, Kagan, Sotomayor, and Bader Ginsburg all voting to deny the appeals, but at least one other justice (Roberts) must have as well.
Proves what I’ve thought all along. There aren’t 4 votes on the Supreme Court to deny equality. Looks as if Scalia, Alito and Thomas are the only votes. Roberts and Kennedy obviously come down on the side of equality.
2 Likes
You are so right and the same applies to black voters in SC:
“The Supreme Court has left intact South Carolina’s redrawn state house and congressional maps.The justices on Monday rejected without comment an appeal from black South Carolina voters who wanted the justices to take another look at the state’s new lines for state house and congressional districts.”
1 Like
A fine example of passing the buck…
or more precisely , KochBucks.
The Bros have over-extended too much buying elections right now.
I don’t consider this “passing the buck.” The Supreme Court is allowing the appellate courts to do their job. When a case finally is granted cert, the SC can issue a 2 word decision: “We affirm”
3 Likes
If there was a way to attach a poison pill regarding anything to do with abortion, the SC would’ve ruled and created an entire new line of logic to esplain their faulty reasoning. The cowardice and social bent of this court is apparent in all that they do.
The wasted opportunities to strengthen America, heal America and truly unite America are beyond shameful. The Roberts court is like a time out in America’s progression. They are clinging to the past and the unpopular views of the minority of the minority.
In the long run, time is on America’s side. We are better than this court and in time we will prove that.
“But the decision will likely expand same-sex marriages to other states covered by the federal appeals courts that already have ruled that the bans are unconstitutional, including Colorado, Wyoming, Kansas, West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina. That would bring to 30 the number of states where gays can marry.”
2 Likes
There is precedent here. The Supreme Court waited until 1967 to rule on mixed race marriages. By 1967, 34 states had overturned the bans. The Warren Court used the “changing social tide” to finally issue a ruling on the unconstitutionality of the bans.
1 Like
By denying cert for these appeals – which cover 15 or 16 states – the Supremes are explicitly telling the remaining circuits, “this is a settled issue.” This is big.
3 Likes