Nevada AG Ends Fight To Uphold Gay Ma...

Nevada AG Ends Fight To Uphold Gay Marriage Ban

There are 16 comments on the EDGE story from Feb 10, 2014, titled Nevada AG Ends Fight To Uphold Gay Marriage Ban. In it, EDGE reports that:

Nevada is withdrawing its efforts to uphold the state's gay marriage ban. Attorney General Catherine Corte Masto filed a motion Monday to withdraw the state's legal arguments in a case pending before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at EDGE.

SteamRoller

Philadelphia, PA

#1 Feb 10, 2014
The AG didn't think the odds favored her.
okohalamuk81

Memphis, TN

#2 Feb 10, 2014
According to the article, it will go to voters in 2016? Why is this going to be placed in the hands of voters?

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#4 Feb 10, 2014
okohalamuk81 wrote:
According to the article, it will go to voters in 2016? Why is this going to be placed in the hands of voters?
There's a legislative attempt to put a repeal of the state's amendment on the ballot, the earliest that could happen is 2016. It will all be over for it long before then.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#8 Feb 11, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>There's a legislative attempt to put a repeal of the state's amendment on the ballot, the earliest that could happen is 2016. It will all be over for it long before then.
But what about the other states in the 9th circuit that still have bans- ID, AK, AZ, MT, OR?

How does this development affect the case going forward?
hi hi

Lancaster, PA

#9 Feb 11, 2014
I can see one thing clearly, and I'm happy to see it.

It's a no-brainer by this point that *if* something happens to reverse all of this course, and all these other "bans" stay in place, the ACLU and other organizations are going to turn right around and start suing for INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, on a case-by-case basis, on a state-by-state basis. That's clearly where this is headed.

These courts can either get this over with or face exponentially *more* lawsuits concerning parenting rights, individual rights of marriage, rights to register this or that, rights having to do with birth and death certificates, etc. That's clearly where this is headed; I almost think they're "planning" that at this point, as it's obvious that they're opening (by now) AS MANY suits as they can, in as many states as they can.

Could it backfire? I wouldn't call that backfiring, but it might all end negatively. However, if it does, nothing stops the ACLU and these other groups from starting to sue on an individual case-by-case basis, state by state, which in some cases *will* result in an "avalanche" of rights in individual states or settings.

What I'm saying is, this is all finally, finally on the right course, and I am VERY glad to see it. Whether that course ends in two years or twenty remains to be seen, but they're finally doing things right now.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#10 Feb 11, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
But what about the other states in the 9th circuit that still have bans- ID, AK, AZ, MT, OR?
How does this development affect the case going forward?
Given that the circuit court ruling would hold precedent over any case originating in those other states, I imagine they would have standing to appeal whatever happens here, even without Nevada's participation.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#11 Feb 11, 2014
hi hi wrote:
I can see one thing clearly, and I'm happy to see it.
It's a no-brainer by this point that *if* something happens to reverse all of this course, and all these other "bans" stay in place, the ACLU and other organizations are going to turn right around and start suing for INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, on a case-by-case basis, on a state-by-state basis. That's clearly where this is headed.
These courts can either get this over with or face exponentially *more* lawsuits concerning parenting rights, individual rights of marriage, rights to register this or that, rights having to do with birth and death certificates, etc. That's clearly where this is headed; I almost think they're "planning" that at this point, as it's obvious that they're opening (by now) AS MANY suits as they can, in as many states as they can.
Could it backfire? I wouldn't call that backfiring, but it might all end negatively. However, if it does, nothing stops the ACLU and these other groups from starting to sue on an individual case-by-case basis, state by state, which in some cases *will* result in an "avalanche" of rights in individual states or settings.
What I'm saying is, this is all finally, finally on the right course, and I am VERY glad to see it. Whether that course ends in two years or twenty remains to be seen, but they're finally doing things right now.
We're pretty much already there, between state and federal cases, there are some 37 cases somewhere in the judicial food chain challenging bans in 29 states. This should all be over no later than early next summer. One or more of these bans will be hauled before the Supremes by their next session.
hi hi

Lancaster, PA

#12 Feb 11, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>We're pretty much already there, between state and federal cases, there are some 37 cases somewhere in the judicial food chain challenging bans in 29 states. This should all be over no later than early next summer. One or more of these bans will be hauled before the Supremes by their next session.
*nodding* And then the pro-gay will know what course to take as these fights continue. The court may simply end all this and declare a nationwide right to marry; then my belief is that fights we cannot fully predict right now will start erupting among the vehemently antigay ... that *they* will be the ones to begin long, long series of lawsuits on every minor grounds they can find. I am almost positive they're going to try that; they DON'T CARE about their chances of winning or losing. To them, this is a "moral imperative" and you fight even if your chances are literally zero. That's their "logic."

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#13 Feb 12, 2014
It's nice to see someone do what is fiscally responsible. Defending these bans amounts to nuisance litigation. Of the many legal theories that have been presented in a number of cases, none has been particularly successful in justifying same sex marriage bans. In particular the case in Oklahoma picked apart the theories put before it to defend the law one by one in great detail. What is more, the Oklahoma ruling found the the law was not subject to Strict Scrutiny, and struck it down for want of a rational basis, which requires a much lower burden of proof. In time all of these laws will disappear. they further no state interest, and allowing same sex couples equal protection of the law to marry has no impact upon anyone who would not enter into such a union.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#15 Feb 12, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>We're pretty much already there, between state and federal cases, there are some 37 cases somewhere in the judicial food chain challenging bans in 29 states. This should all be over no later than early next summer. One or more of these bans will be hauled before the Supremes by their next session.
I still don't think the SCOTUS is in any hurry to take another "gay marriage" case.

The 9th circuit will almost certainly issue their ruling this year, but the other circuits may not rule until next year. And the 2 other circuits who could possibly rule this year- the 10th & 4th- are likely to rule the same as the 9th.

We'll probably have to wait until one of the more conservative dominated circuits- the 6th or 5th- rules against us. And they tend to move slower.

So I still think the earliest we could see the SCOTUS taking a case would be the 2015/16 term, with a ruling in Jun 2016.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#16 Feb 12, 2014
hi hi wrote:
<quoted text>
*nodding* And then the pro-gay will know what course to take as these fights continue. The court may simply end all this and declare a nationwide right to marry; then my belief is that fights we cannot fully predict right now will start erupting among the vehemently antigay ... that *they* will be the ones to begin long, long series of lawsuits on every minor grounds they can find. I am almost positive they're going to try that; they DON'T CARE about their chances of winning or losing. To them, this is a "moral imperative" and you fight even if your chances are literally zero. That's their "logic."
We're already seeing how the anti-gays are going to respond to a national right to marry; they'll pass bills like the one in Kansas which will allow any business or individual refuse to recognize married same-sex couples.

Of course those laws will set off an entire new round of lawsuits, guaranteeing this issue will be litigated for decades to come. Kinda like the abortion issue.

That's the danger of going to the SCOTUS too soon; they may not want to light that fuse. But to continue the metaphor, the sparks are already flying.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#17 Feb 12, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Given that the circuit court ruling would hold precedent over any case originating in those other states, I imagine they would have standing to appeal whatever happens here, even without Nevada's participation.
What if the 9th limits their ruling to states which give all the rights & benefits of marriage under civil unions/domestic partnerships? That is the central argument in the Nevada case, and such a ruling would only affect Nevada & Oregon who are both unlikely to appeal.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#18 Feb 12, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
I still don't think the SCOTUS is in any hurry to take another "gay marriage" case.
The 9th circuit will almost certainly issue their ruling this year, but the other circuits may not rule until next year. And the 2 other circuits who could possibly rule this year- the 10th & 4th- are likely to rule the same as the 9th.
We'll probably have to wait until one of the more conservative dominated circuits- the 6th or 5th- rules against us. And they tend to move slower.
So I still think the earliest we could see the SCOTUS taking a case would be the 2015/16 term, with a ruling in Jun 2016.
They aren't in a hurry to hear another of these cases, but they are all heading their way at a pretty good clip. I'd actually be surprised if one, if not more, of these federal challenges isn't ready for review by this fall, but the real wild card are the state court challenges that are out there. The Texas Supremes have yet to rule in the divorce cases and there may be more ready for direct appeal before summer.

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#19 Feb 13, 2014
okohalamuk81 wrote:
According to the article, it will go to voters in 2016? Why is this going to be placed in the hands of voters?
I know. What a strange idea it is to think the politicians and judicial system work for the people who vote on the laws of the land and then enforce those laws. I suppose you think it's better for some biased judge or AG to decide what is and isn't best for the people who pay their salary instead of upholding the laws on the books. Grow up. When these idiots change something you don't agree with, just remember it's for the best because they know better than you. Pull your head out. Please don't insult my intelligence and say they unilaterally change things because of the constitution. Anyone with half a brain knows judges and politicians gave up on the constitution long ago for expediency and have put so many holes in it, that it is now just a shredded document in the way of their social agendas. Politicians and judges are a joke and those like you as well as those on the other side of the issue are merely sheep with no evidence of brain function.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#20 Feb 13, 2014
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>They aren't in a hurry to hear another of these cases, but they are all heading their way at a pretty good clip. I'd actually be surprised if one, if not more, of these federal challenges isn't ready for review by this fall, but the real wild card are the state court challenges that are out there. The Texas Supremes have yet to rule in the divorce cases and there may be more ready for direct appeal before summer.
Oh I agree some cases will be ready for review by this fall, but the SCOTUS is certainly under no obligation to accept any of them.

I think that's where the delay will come in; the SCOTUS will simply refuse to take any case for now, waiting for multiple cases with conflicting rulings.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#21 Feb 13, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh I agree some cases will be ready for review by this fall, but the SCOTUS is certainly under no obligation to accept any of them.
I think that's where the delay will come in; the SCOTUS will simply refuse to take any case for now, waiting for multiple cases with conflicting rulings.
The more cases they duck, the more complicated they make the situation, that's why I'm sure they will hear this one out next session, conflicting rulings or not.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 2 min Here is what I 36,029
News Obama names Stonewall national monument; first ... 5 min Here is what I 19
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 15 min Rose_NoHo 37,189
News Protester blames Christians for gay nightclub s... 57 min Rose_NoHo 43
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 1 hr WasteWater 12,916
News Sanders: Don't blame Islam for Orlando shooting 1 hr Truth Teller 510
News The Pride parade takes place two weeks after th... 1 hr Well Done 4
News Obama: Notion that being armed would have saved... 1 hr HornDawg 844
News Man Accused Of Firing Paintballs At Stockton Ga... 3 hr handjob 41
More from around the web