Why the Supreme Court may not say ‘I do’ to gay marriage

There are 567 comments on the news.yahoo.com story from Jun 18, 2013, titled Why the Supreme Court may not say ‘I do’ to gay marriage. In it, news.yahoo.com reports that:

With the Supreme Court expected to issue major rulings on same-sex marriage any day now, ABC News court watcher Terry Moran tells Top Line that the court will likely avoid making a monumental ruling on the issue.

Moran says the justices “don’t want to be the judges of America when it comes to this issue” and predicts that they will find a way to defer to the states in the two cases dealing with same-sex marriage.

“They see this roiling democratic debate that's happening state-by-state, and the betting at the Supreme Court is that they'll find a way to decide this issue by getting themselves out of it,” Moran says. “They won't declare gay marriage legal all over the country or illegal. They'll say, 'Let the states handle it.'"

Join the discussion below, or Read more at news.yahoo.com.

First Prev
of 29
Next Last

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#1 Jun 18, 2013
Hopefully DOMA and Prop. 8 will be stuck down though.

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#2 Jun 18, 2013
Thursday maybe? Waiting for the opinions to hang out and dry.

Seems like its taking forever.

Since: Apr 08

Rockwood, Canada

#3 Jun 18, 2013
equalityboy81 wrote:
Hopefully DOMA and Prop. 8 will be stuck down though.
Let's hope so. They can't cop out with the "let the states deal with it" excuse with DOMA because it's not a state-level law at all. Federal laws need to be dealt with at the federal level.

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

#4 Jun 18, 2013
equalityboy81 wrote:
Hopefully DOMA and Prop. 8 will be stuck down though.
I believe that although there are a number of different ways that SCOTUS can rule with regards to Prop 8, no matter how they rule on it, it will be effectively killed.

And I believe the section 3 of DOMA, and perhaps the entire Act, will be ruled unconstitutional as a violation of the "Full Faith and Credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution.

I think they will issue their rulings on the Prop 8 case and the DOMA case next Monday morning, so we have less than 6 more days to wait.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#5 Jun 18, 2013
The SCotUS could have "let the States handle it" simply by refusing to grant Certiorary in the PropH8 case.

The same doesn't apply to Windsor, which is a clearly Federal case.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#6 Jun 18, 2013
This is just another step toward equality. It's going to take a change on the SCOTUS before we get marriage equality nationwide.

We'll get California back and federal recognition, and go from there.

The big question is whether Obama will require the federal govt to recognize all marriages regardless of where the couple currently resides.
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#7 Jun 18, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
This is just another step toward equality. It's going to take a change on the SCOTUS before we get marriage equality nationwide.
We'll get California back and federal recognition, and go from there.
The big question is whether Obama will require the federal govt to recognize all marriages regardless of where the couple currently resides.
I'm not sure it's Mr. Obama's call to make, but I believe there is a reciprocity section in the Constitution that will cover that for you.
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#8 Jun 18, 2013
snyper wrote:
The SCotUS could have "let the States handle it" simply by refusing to grant Certiorary in the PropH8 case.
The same doesn't apply to Windsor, which is a clearly Federal case.
You're likely right re the Court declining to make a blanket ruling, those those who are desperate to sound ever so clever by calling it ?Prop H8" just look stupid, not to mention dishonest. Of course if some enjoy playing the victim and looking stupid just for giggles, be my guest. Just don't expect everybody to play that game.

And to prove once again that can foretell the future, some moron(s) will play the bigot card and expect to be taken seriously.(Yes, I am baiting the stupid ones.)
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#9 Jun 18, 2013
I really should put on my reading glasses when I have to deal with such small type... and minds.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#10 Jun 18, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
The big question is whether Obama will require the federal govt to recognize all marriages regardless of where the couple currently resides.
Most likely the IRS will require that initially; then the law will follow

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#11 Jun 18, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> I'm not sure it's Mr. Obama's call to make, but I believe there is a reciprocity section in the Constitution that will cover that for you.
That's the problem. SCOTUS has consistently DODGED citing the F.F.&C.C. of Article 4 Sections one and two when it comes to the Federal Right to marry.

True it has essentially said "marriage" is a civil right. BUT it hasn't been specific enough!

I HOPE and PRAY that SCOTUS finally says I'm an equal citizen both on the Federal level and here in Florida where I now live. As well as in Ohio where I was born and Delaware and Maryland where I used to live.

Until then I don't have the same rights as heterosexual citizens.
alan

Lincoln, CA

#12 Jun 18, 2013
Depending on whether the writer is pro or against gay marriage their article opinion leans that way. So I am resolved to wait until we hear from SCOTUS.
Willis

Anonymous Proxy

#13 Jun 18, 2013
They've already wasted enough time on this gay nonsense. I wish they would just say no to homo-marriage and move on to more important issues.
Willis

Anonymous Proxy

#14 Jun 18, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
The big question is whether Obama will require the federal govt to recognize all marriages regardless of where the couple currently resides.
The government already does recognize all marriages (real ones) regardless of where the couple currently resides.
KMX

Houston, TX

#15 Jun 18, 2013
Willis wrote:
<quoted text>
The government already does recognize all marriages (real ones) regardless of where the couple currently resides.
Except in all of those states and the District of Columbia where those REAL marriages include same-sex couples.

“Common courtesy, isn't”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#16 Jun 18, 2013
Willis wrote:
They've already wasted enough time on this gay nonsense. I wish they would just say no to homo-marriage and move on to more important issues.
Hon, if the SCOTUS says "no" on these two fairly narrow cases, then that's just going to cause this issue to drag on longer, state by state ... and it will eventually end up back at the Supreme Court with a challenge based on the FF&CC of the Constitution.

The misguided, unconstitutional opposition to same sex marriage is why this is dragging on so long and taking up time that you would rather see devoted to other issues. Tell your ideological cronies to get out of the way of the Constitution, and YOU stop wasting everyone's time. Then the problem will be solved.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#17 Jun 18, 2013
Willis wrote:
They've already wasted enough time on this gay nonsense. I wish they would just say no to homo-marriage and move on to more important issues.
DOOFUS ALERT

Unfortunately for you the Federal Government said OK to "homo-marriages" in the Defense of Marriage Act!

LMAO!

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#18 Jun 18, 2013
DOMA was DOA, the questions about the BLAG's standing, only serving to give everyone a say in killing it. On the Prop 8 case, I still say their only available option is the mass extinction of all the amendments and that's going to make some folk scream bloody murder. Unless they are willing to repudiate what they did in Romer, they have no other choice. Making their decision at this point to be California specific would be self-defeating, because any issue they have which might be shared by any of the other amendments, only paints a target on them and invites a whole slew of new cases against them. What I really doubt that we will be getting is the extension of Loving to go along with it. States aren't going to be forced into allowing same sex marriages, but they are going to lose the power to deny recognition under most circumstances. I have the feeling that this one will hit their outbox just as they are all getting the f*ck out of Dodge.

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

#19 Jun 18, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
DOMA was DOA, the questions about the BLAG's standing, only serving to give everyone a say in killing it. On the Prop 8 case, I still say their only available option is the mass extinction of all the amendments and that's going to make some folk scream bloody murder. Unless they are willing to repudiate what they did in Romer, they have no other choice. Making their decision at this point to be California specific would be self-defeating, because any issue they have which might be shared by any of the other amendments, only paints a target on them and invites a whole slew of new cases against them. What I really doubt that we will be getting is the extension of Loving to go along with it. States aren't going to be forced into allowing same sex marriages, but they are going to lose the power to deny recognition under most circumstances. I have the feeling that this one will hit their outbox just as they are all getting the f*ck out of Dodge.
I believe that SCOTUS will announce both decisions next Monday morning, about 5-1/2 days from now.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#20 Jun 18, 2013
Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
<quoted text>
Hon, if the SCOTUS says "no" on these two fairly narrow cases, then that's just going to cause this issue to drag on longer, state by state ... and it will eventually end up back at the Supreme Court with a challenge based on the FF&CC of the Constitution.
The misguided, unconstitutional opposition to same sex marriage is why this is dragging on so long and taking up time that you would rather see devoted to other issues. Tell your ideological cronies to get out of the way of the Constitution, and YOU stop wasting everyone's time. Then the problem will be solved.
YUP!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 29
Next Last

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 Josh Duggar apology not enough? Fallout from mo... 2 min mitt s santorum s... 4
News The right therapy for LGBT youth 3 min zyondra 274
News Mom: Outed pastor told gay son he's going to hell 4 min JohnInToronto 14
News Boy Scouts' leader speaks out on gay adults ban 5 min Wondering 29
News Lawmakers Consider Gay Discrimination Policies 5 min NorCal Native 4,344
News SoCal Rep Wants to Outlaw Gay-to-Straight "Conv... 9 min Wondering 89
News Gay couple has adoption vacated now that they c... 10 min Fa-Foxy 4
News 60 Percent: Record Number Of Americans Support ... 13 min Wondering 88
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 34 min Respect71 21,432
News Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? (Sep '14) 1 hr Techno Tits 5,536
More from around the web