Same Sex Marriage Thread - Part III

[Irvine511]

[nbcrusader]

Enjoyed hearing an analysis of the two decisions by my old Constitutional Law professor, Irwin Chemerinsky (now dean of the UC Irvine Law School).

While this may be considered a double win by headline, the court did so in the most narrow and potentially harmful way.

DOMA still stands as law - only the provision denying federal benefits to same sex couples (if entitled to such benefits under state law) was struck. This essentially kicks the issue back to the states for the continued, drawn-out fight. It would have been far better to overturn the entire act and validate SSM on a nationwide basis.

Prop 8 was a far worse decision as it failed to address SSM. Rather than affirming a lower court decision striking the law down as unconstitutional, the court merely stated that the parties who challenged the decision lacked standing. Still no direct validation of SSM.

Now, while you may enjoy the result in this case, the Supreme Court's decision has a potentially negative impact on future initiatives. In essence, if the majority of people pass a law by initiative (usually done because the party in power refuses to address an issue), the people who bring the initiative to the people lack the ability to defend the initiative in court. Let's say the newly passed initiative is challenged in court - the party in power can elect to not defend the initiative and the people who brought the initiative lack standing to challenge a court's ruling.

If Jerry Brown had made a feeble attempt to defend Prop 8, SCOTUS may have arrived at a broader, more conclusive decision.

[BoMac]

Keep Calm and Marry On.

[mobvok]

Originally Posted by nbcrusader

Prop 8 was a far worse decision as it failed to address SSM. Rather than affirming a lower court decision striking the law down as unconstitutional, the court merely stated that the parties who challenged the decision lacked standing. Still no direct validation of SSM.

Now, while you may enjoy the result in this case, the Supreme Court's decision has a potentially negative impact on future initiatives. In essence, if the majority of people pass a law by initiative (usually done because the party in power refuses to address an issue), the people who bring the initiative to the people lack the ability to defend the initiative in court. Let's say the newly passed initiative is challenged in court - the party in power can elect to not defend the initiative and the people who brought the initiative lack standing to challenge a court's ruling.

If Jerry Brown had made a feeble attempt to defend Prop 8, SCOTUS may have arrived at a broader, more conclusive decision.

Yeah, if they couldn't cobble together a Prop 8 majority on the merits maybe this is a better track, but that seems like an awfully ominous development for initiatives. In my home state of Washington they've basically become corporate initiatives, so I'm wary of how much they represent The People, but if the ostensible principle is advancing those interests, the powers that be shouldn't be able to silently shut it down even if they lose.

[martha]

Meanwhile, people are getting engaged!

[PennyLanePHINS]

So, is it legal in California, or in a few months?

In about a year in addition to California, it'll probably be legal in Hawaii, Oregon, & Illinois. Possibly Michigan. And by then it'll be legal for half the population, possibly a slight majority?

It's actually likely now that it could be legal nationwide by 2018 or 2019.

[corianderstem]

Mariners to set MLB history by flying gay Pride flag for game Sunday | Q13 FOX News

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by PennyLanePHINS

So, is it legal in California, or in a few months?

In about a year in addition to California, it'll probably be legal in Hawaii, Oregon, & Illinois. Possibly Michigan. And by then it'll be legal for half the population, possibly a slight majority?

It's actually likely now that it could be legal nationwide by 2018 or 2019.

i could go look it up, but i think it will be legal in CA in a matter of weeks -- just as long as it takes for the state government to get it together.

CA is major. it's 40m people, the 7th (?) largest economy in the world, and the most important state in the US.

right now, the capitol (DC), the biggest city (NYC), and the biggest state (CA) all have marriage equality.

[deep]

Originally Posted by PennyLanePHINS

So, is it legal in California, or in a few months?

In about a year in addition to California, it'll probably be legal in Hawaii, Oregon, & Illinois. Possibly Michigan. And by then it'll be legal for half the population, possibly a slight majority?

It's actually likely now that it could be legal nationwide by 2018 or 2019.

That might be a little optimistic. It may go like MLK Jr Holiday where the last few hold out states are boycotted.
That boycott seems a lot more legit than the MLK holiday boycotts.

[mobvok]

Nate Silver ‏@fivethirtyeight 31m

By August, about 600m people worldwide will live in states/countries with gay marriage vs. about 300m a year ago.

We're in the exponential phase of growth right now

[martha]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

the most important state in the US.

Didn't want to let this go by unnoticed.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by martha

Didn't want to let this go by unnoticed.

well, it is, objectively. biggest economy, biggest population, cultural weathervane, etc.

[martha]

Weather, beauty, weather.

[Pearl]

Sorry to be late for the party, but hooray! I'm so glad this happened!

http://www.theonion.com/articles/gay...e-court-ruling

[deep]

this ruling will break up a lot of straight couples, that is for sure

[deep]

.

Chief Justice Roberts - Let the states decide gay marriage.

WASHINGTON—After months of deliberation, the U.S. Supreme Court opted today to leave the ultimate decision on whether homosexuals should be allowed to marry in the more than capable hands of states such as Texas, Alabama, and Georgia. “As to the issue of gay marriage itself, we will not interfere with the individual commonwealth’s authority to fairly and competently dictate its own laws in these matters, seeing as states such as, for instance, Georgia have time and again proven themselves eminently adept at making the fairest and most reasoned of decisions,” said Chief Justice John Roberts of the state where sodomy laws were fiercely enforced until federally overturned in 2003. “Though the court’s ruling will delay the recognition of gay marriage on a state-by-state basis, the nation’s homosexuals should rest easy knowing that their freedoms and right to the pursuit of happiness lie within the famously rational and egalitarian legislatures of states such as Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, Florida, Montana, Utah, and West Virginia.” Roberts added that “who better” to have final authority on signing equal rights legislation into law than the likes of Jan Brewer, Rick Perry, and Scott Walker.

[cobl04]

Loved this.



And this is great - Tasmanian Upper House passes gay adoption bill - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

[Galeongirl]

Gotta love Cyanide & Happiness!

[AEON]

When I saw yesterday's headline - I thought about many of the posters here at Interference, those on both sides of the gay marriage issue. While my own conscience does not accept the concept of gay marriage, as I believe it is ultimately a Sacrament and not a mere legal expression - I do feel this will help homosexuals being treated equally before the law as individuals, and that is a good thing.

btw - I can't believe I saw nbcrusader's name a few posts back...

[BVS]

AEON, NBC, and DOMA being overturned all in one week?

Is this a sign of the end?