Discussion for article #228350
The Supreme Court is allowing the appeals courts to do their job. Until there are opposing decisions, the Supreme Court will not get involved. Roberts doesn’t want another Roe to define his Chief Justiceship.
I’m sorry, but the Roberts Supreme Court is nothing more than a fucking joke. Conservatives love to whine about “activist” judges but sure do love the right wing rubber stamp made up of the 5 conservative Justices.
Only takes 4 Justices to hear a case/cases. Obviously Roberts and Kennedy want the lower appeals courts rulings to stand.
I thought the Supreme upheld an appeal to NOT allow gay marriage recognition pending their review…maybe it was Utah…can’t recall. I do recall that military people in a same sex relationship were being denied their marriage rights in a state they were stationed in. How can the court not act on this? Am I mistaken?
Roberts legacy is already considerably tarnished.
He’s smart to let this remain at the appeals level for now, so that when the Supremes do take up the issue, he won’t be held responsible by the right-wing crazies—and that’s the group that matters to him in terms of his legacy.
Roberts, Breyer Kagen, Bader-Ginsberg, Sotomayor and Kennedy probably want more case law and a direct appeal before hearing the case. Thomas and Alito probably don’t want to hear the case at all. Scalia just doesn’t want to have his own words thrown back at him.
Stay pending appeal is a pro-forma ruling. Almost always given. Doesn’t mean that the people applying for the stay will be successful. As is proved here.
I have a feeling that, if the Supreme Court finally takes up the issue, Roberts will vote with the majority to allow marriage equality.
http://ken_ashford.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/couldnt_be_gayer_if_they_were_in_chaps.jpg
(Roberts on left)
As a completely non-political entity they’d like to wait until after the election.
Translation: The majority doesn’t want to rule for, but hasn’t yet figured out a way to rule against.
I respectfully disagree. I think a majority is in favor of marriage equality (A majority including Roberts and Kennedy), but wants unanimous Appeals Court rulings before they issue a two word decision: “We affirm”
I agree—but it has to seem inevitable to his wingnut base, or they’ll call him a traitor.
I disrespectfully disagree.
They don’t want to rock the cart on what is supposed to be a GOP election year. Rule one way, they rile the libtards, rule the other way they depress their base.
But they’re totally apolitical.
4 liberal justices + Kennedy (read his opinion in Lawrence) are in favor of equality. Even if the Supreme Court had taken one of these cases, the decision would not have been issued until well after the November elections. Might not have even been heard until January.
Ok calling all attorneys here. Would someone please interrupt the list of cases linked in this article? I’m not an attorney. Just an ordinary person. I don’t know what all that legalese means. Thanks
Synopsis of all the cases here:
http://americansformarriageequality.org/
With another here:
http://americansformarriageequality.org/marriage-in-the-courts
I was referring to this link: http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/100214zr_086c.pdf
Those are the cases the Court will hear. None of them deal with the SSM cases.
If you want info on those cases, (the ones under certiorari granted), just enter the case in a search engine. For example, EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc.
What it looks like to me is Ginsberg was right a few weeks ago when she said that the decision in the 6th Circuit would make all the difference. Based on the oral arguments and the fact that two of the three judges are conservatives, the betting has been that the 6th Circuit would buck the trend and uphold the bans. The Court hasn’t rejected the appeals but not yet decided to take them or not. When the 6th Circuit’s decision comes down, if it is against the trend, they will do so. If it is not against the trend, they will let things play out in other Circuits. Sooner or later, if not the 6th than probably the 5th, one of the more conservative circuits is likely to uphold the bans and force the Court to take it up.