Gay marriage fight may hinge on Supreme Court's Anthony Kennedy

Feb 8, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Los Angeles Times

The Supreme Court has nine justices, but if the constitutional fight over same-sex marriage reaches them this year, the decision will probably come down to just one: a California Republican and Reagan-era conservative who has nonetheless written the court's two leading gay rights opinions.

Comments
1 - 16 of 16 Comments Last updated Feb 11, 2012

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Feb 9, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I do not think they will vote to hear this case. They're gonna leave it strictly as a California thing.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Feb 9, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

FaFoxy wrote:
I do not think they will vote to hear this case. They're gonna leave it strictly as a California thing.
I agree. They, as a group, don't want to touch it.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Feb 9, 2012
 
Me too.

Unfortunately if the Prop8 people believe that as well, then they'll ask for an en banc review first, just to keep the current ban in place for another year.

I wonder how long the en banc panel has to decide whether or not to take the case? Any idea?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Feb 9, 2012
 
I'll answer my own question from info on the Prop8trialtracker site.

They Prop8 people have 14 days to request an en banc hearing or 90 days to appeal directly to the SCOTUS.

The 9th circuit usually takes a couple of months just to decide whether to grant an appeal or not.

If the appeal is granted, then it'll be another year or more before a final decision is issued.

If the appeal is denied, the Prop8 people then have 90 days to file a SCOTUS appeal. If that happens after Jun, then the SCOTUS won't even consider whether to take the case until the new term begins in Oct.

So the EARLIEST this could all be over would be this summer- assuming the 9th & the SCOTUS both refuse an appeal. Anything else means at least 2013 or even 2014 before a final decision.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Feb 9, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

'Same' means not different genders.'Sex' means different genders.'Marriage' of humans means different genders.

To say 'same-sex' makes no sense. No such can be.

The first priority of a law is that it make sense. Same sex marriage does not make sense, and it has absolutely NOTHING to do with being for or against homosexuality.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Feb 9, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

WMCOL wrote:
'Same' means not different genders.'Sex' means different genders.'Marriage' of humans means different genders.
To say 'same-sex' makes no sense. No such can be.
The first priority of a law is that it make sense. Same sex marriage does not make sense, and it has absolutely NOTHING to do with being for or against homosexuality.
"Sex" means "different genders"??!! Um, what dictionary are you using? You might want to ask for a refund.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Feb 9, 2012
 
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Sex" means "different genders"??!! Um, what dictionary are you using? You might want to ask for a refund.
==========
sex
&#8194; &#8194;

noun
1.
either the male or female division of a species, especially as DIFFERENTIATED with reference to the reproductive functions.

2.
the sum of the structural and functional DIFFERENCES by which the male and female are distinguished, or the phenomena or behavior dependent on these differences.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Feb 9, 2012
 
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Sex" means "different genders"??!! Um, what dictionary are you using? You might want to ask for a refund.
==========

THEY ALL SAY SAME THING. IT IS WHAT IT IS.

Miriam Webster:

"sex
noun \&#712;seks\

Definition of SEX

1: either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures

2: the sum of the structural, functional, and behavioral characteristics of organisms that are involved in reproduction marked by the union of gametes and that distinguish males and females "

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Feb 9, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WMCOL wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
THEY ALL SAY SAME THING. IT IS WHAT IT IS.
Miriam Webster:
"sex
noun \&#712;seks\
Definition of SEX
1: either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures
2: the sum of the structural, functional, and behavioral characteristics of organisms that are involved in reproduction marked by the union of gametes and that distinguish males and females "
I see. So it's not reading that is your problem, it's comprehension. Got it. Thanks for the posts.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Feb 9, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I see. So it's not reading that is your problem, it's comprehension. Got it. Thanks for the posts.
No proof of that, but you did just perfectly describe yourself.

“Greetings!”

Since: Dec 06

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Feb 9, 2012
 
I think they will appeal to the FULL panel - if for no other reason than to keep in place the "Stay" - thus still preventing same-sex couples from getting married in CA.

That said, if they DO try an appeal to the SCOTUS, i'm betting my right arm that they will DENY the appeal due to how both decisions were written, the citations used and the overall weakness of the pro-prop-8 case. If SCOTUS denies hearing the appeal, the stay is immediatly lifted and gay marriage will again be legal in CA.

SCOTUS will NOT take the case for another reason: one of the KEY cases cited in the case (by the team fighting to overturn prop 8) was a SCOTUS case written by Judge Scalia. He won't like seeing his ruling being used in support of a case to overturn prop 8. Not only would it be an embarassment, it could cause precident (if SCOTUS upholds the lower courts ruling) and set in motion more legal issus.

ALso, because the appeals court ruling put a clear limit on CA only, if SCOTUS takes up the case and finds Prop 8 unconstitutional - that WOULD be a national precident and, by all judicial-watchers - would invalidate ALL laws in every state where marriage is defined as one man and one woman.

The prop 8 case is just too weak and there's too much at stake (from a pro-prop8 perspective) to appeal to SCOTUS.

Now, assuming SCOTUS denies to hear the case and the stay is lifted, it WILL send a signal to all other states that their law may be succpetable to appeal. While CA's law is unique in that it took away a right that was in place prior, the core rulings still center around the equal protection clause! It's going to be an interesting few months!

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Feb 9, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

TampaBob wrote:
I think they will appeal to the FULL panel - if for no other reason than to keep in place the "Stay" - thus still preventing same-sex couples from getting married in CA.
That said, if they DO try an appeal to the SCOTUS, i'm betting my right arm that they will DENY the appeal due to how both decisions were written, the citations used and the overall weakness of the pro-prop-8 case. If SCOTUS denies hearing the appeal, the stay is immediatly lifted and gay marriage will again be legal in CA.
SCOTUS will NOT take the case for another reason: one of the KEY cases cited in the case (by the team fighting to overturn prop 8) was a SCOTUS case written by Judge Scalia. He won't like seeing his ruling being used in support of a case to overturn prop 8. Not only would it be an embarassment, it could cause precident (if SCOTUS upholds the lower courts ruling) and set in motion more legal issus.
ALso, because the appeals court ruling put a clear limit on CA only, if SCOTUS takes up the case and finds Prop 8 unconstitutional - that WOULD be a national precident and, by all judicial-watchers - would invalidate ALL laws in every state where marriage is defined as one man and one woman.
The prop 8 case is just too weak and there's too much at stake (from a pro-prop8 perspective) to appeal to SCOTUS.
Now, assuming SCOTUS denies to hear the case and the stay is lifted, it WILL send a signal to all other states that their law may be succpetable to appeal. While CA's law is unique in that it took away a right that was in place prior, the core rulings still center around the equal protection clause! It's going to be an interesting few months!
I agree.
Adam in AZ

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Feb 9, 2012
 

Judged:

1

WMCOL wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
sex
&#8194; &#8194;
noun
1.
either the male or female division of a species, especially as DIFFERENTIATED with reference to the reproductive functions.
2.
the sum of the structural and functional DIFFERENCES by which the male and female are distinguished, or the phenomena or behavior dependent on these differences.
Take some time to contemplate the terms, different and differentiated. Take a fish oil first. I heard it improves brain function.

ANYONE who thinks this is an argument that can be settled by Webster is being intentionally dishonest.
BigTex

Red Oak, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Feb 10, 2012
 
did Supreme Court rule in favor of interracial marriage or was that a state by state thing?

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Feb 11, 2012
 
WMCOL wrote:
'Same' means not different genders.'Sex' means different genders.'Marriage' of humans means different genders.
To say 'same-sex' makes no sense. No such can be.
The first priority of a law is that it make sense. Same sex marriage does not make sense, and it has absolutely NOTHING to do with being for or against homosexuality.
No Dear, it just doesn't make sense to YOU. Possibly because you are oddly lacking in empathy. But that has nothing do with anyone else.

Yes, being against something that is profoundly beneficial to others simply because you find the idea "icky" IS being against that group, in a personal and detrimental way.

The rest of your post makes no sense. The word "sex" means many things, but "DIFFERENT genders" is not really one of them. And your personal definition of the word marriage is not relevant, either.

Same-sex means, in this context, two people of the same gender, and yes, marriage makes perfect sense for them, if they choose it freely, and happen to be gay.

It would not make sense for someone who is not gay.

Please try to keep up.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Feb 11, 2012
 
BigTex wrote:
did Supreme Court rule in favor of interracial marriage or was that a state by state thing?
It was state by state until the SCOTUS finally stepped in with Loving v Virginia in 1967.

What is notable is that prior to that SCOTUS ruling the federal govt recognized inter-racial marriages so long as they were legal in the state where they were performed. So if an inter-racial couple got married in New York, the federal govt recognized the marriage even if they subsequently moved to Alabama where their marriage wasn't legal according to the state.

That will be a significant part in overturning the current federal DOMA. It shows that even with the racial tensions at the time, the feds deferred to the states on marriage laws, as compared to today when they refuse to recognize legal marriages between same-sex couples.

Gill v OPM will overturn that in the next year or two.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••