Court hearing set over gay marriage b...

Court hearing set over gay marriage ban in Va.

There are 20 comments on the Bellingham Herald story from Feb 4, 2014, titled Court hearing set over gay marriage ban in Va.. In it, Bellingham Herald reports that:

In this Jan. 23, 2014 file photo, Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring speaks at a news conference at his office in Richmond, Va.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Bellingham Herald.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#1 Feb 4, 2014
I think the court will strike down the law on it's merits. Moreover, the defendants may, like the defendants in the Prop 8 case, lack standing to defend the ban.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#3 Feb 4, 2014
Fa-Foxy wrote:
I think the court will strike down the law on it's merits. Moreover, the defendants may, like the defendants in the Prop 8 case, lack standing to defend the ban.
The similarity is interesting
.
we even have the same lawyers; Theodore Olson and David Boies; who are not in the fight to lose it

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#4 Feb 4, 2014
Fa-Foxy wrote:
I think the court will strike down the law on it's merits. Moreover, the defendants may, like the defendants in the Prop 8 case, lack standing to defend the ban.
In the Perry case, there were no defendants who wanted to defend the amendment, which resulted in the intervenors. Here, even though the AG has bailed, the other named defendant, the County Clerk for Norfolk, is putting up a defense.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#5 Feb 4, 2014
Yes, unfortunately they specifically named the clerks in their lawsuits.

Not sure why they did that, but it prevents a Prop 8 type ruling.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#6 Feb 4, 2014
The big question is will there be a full trial, or are all parties asking for a summary judgment?

I know in the Texas case both sides have requested a summary judgment which means a ruling could happen soon after oral arguments later this month.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#7 Feb 4, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
Yes, unfortunately they specifically named the clerks in their lawsuits.
Not sure why they did that, but it prevents a Prop 8 type ruling.
The Perry case had the Clerks for both LA ans San Francisco as named defendants, but they both declined to mount a defense. When the Illinois case was still going, it originally named the Cook County clerk, they ended up having to recruit county clerks to be sued All of these cases, ostensibly, are against a local official responsible for handing out licenses.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#8 Feb 4, 2014
The judge in Virginia is expected to issue her ruling in a matter weeks.

That puts the 4th circuit in play this summer/fall along with the 9th & 10th, and possibly the 5th depending on how soon the judge in Texas issues his summary judgment too.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#9 Feb 4, 2014
Wow, this snowball is a rollin' downhill fast......

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#10 Feb 4, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
Wow, this snowball is a rollin' downhill fast......
The people flattened by it are not going to be happy.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#11 Feb 5, 2014
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
The people flattened by it are not going to be happy.
Those people have been making us unhappy since 1952; so now it's THEIR turn to be unhappy for 62 years

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#12 Feb 5, 2014
We could have a decision by the end of the month, if not sooner.

Then it's on to the 4th circuit.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#14 Feb 5, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
We could have a decision by the end of the month, if not sooner.
Then it's on to the 4th circuit.
After Judge Walker announced his decision, he issued a stay at the request of the pro-Prop 8 people. As we all know the pro-Prop 8 people were unsuccessful in their further court proceedings.

And since public opinion has swung more in our favor since Prop 8, I wonder if a stay will be granted, if asked for, if the judge's decision is once again in our favor. Given the events of the past few years, with so many court decisions in our favor, and so many other states granting us equal marriage rights, the judge may decide NOT to issue a stay of her decision.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#15 Feb 5, 2014
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
After Judge Walker announced his decision, he issued a stay at the request of the pro-Prop 8 people. As we all know the pro-Prop 8 people were unsuccessful in their further court proceedings.
And since public opinion has swung more in our favor since Prop 8, I wonder if a stay will be granted, if asked for, if the judge's decision is once again in our favor. Given the events of the past few years, with so many court decisions in our favor, and so many other states granting us equal marriage rights, the judge may decide NOT to issue a stay of her decision.
Actually the State already asked for a stay if the ruling is to overturn the VA ban.

And considering the SCOTUS granted a stay in the Utah case, it seems quite logical they would do the same in this case. So I expect the judge will stay her own ruling until the 4th circuit hears the appeal.

The same will likely happen in Texas later this month as well. And in Michigan next month. And in Oregon after that. Etc, etc, etc.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#16 Feb 5, 2014
More important, will the 9th circuit or SCOTUS stay that ruling when it is issued this summer pending a decision on the cert request.

If the SCOTUS refuses a stay there, that pretty much tips their hand that cert won't be granted.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#17 Feb 5, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually the State already asked for a stay if the ruling is to overturn the VA ban.
And considering the SCOTUS granted a stay in the Utah case, it seems quite logical they would do the same in this case. So I expect the judge will stay her own ruling until the 4th circuit hears the appeal.
The same will likely happen in Texas later this month as well. And in Michigan next month. And in Oregon after that. Etc, etc, etc.
I think that there's a good chance that a stay will not be granted by this judge if the decision favors, as there is real harm to the plaintiffs if a stay is granted, and no demonstrable harm if the stay is not granted, as evidence by the decisions, and ongoing marriages in other states.

And doing this on a state by state basis at this point is a waste of resources as what we really need is a ruling by SCOTUS on the issue of whether Americans have a U.S. Constitutional RIGHT to marry whom they wish, regardless of gender. THAT is the crux of the debate. Is the answer YES or NO ? It's as simple as that.(I say YES).

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#18 Feb 5, 2014
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I think that there's a good chance that a stay will not be granted by this judge if the decision favors, as there is real harm to the plaintiffs if a stay is granted, and no demonstrable harm if the stay is not granted, as evidence by the decisions, and ongoing marriages in other states.
And doing this on a state by state basis at this point is a waste of resources as what we really need is a ruling by SCOTUS on the issue of whether Americans have a U.S. Constitutional RIGHT to marry whom they wish, regardless of gender. THAT is the crux of the debate. Is the answer YES or NO ? It's as simple as that.(I say YES).
Once again you're being overly optimistic.

Other than wishful thinking, is there any logical reason to believe the SCOTUS wouldn't issue a stay in this case just like they did in Utah?

I agree this must eventually go to the SCOTUS, and WILL eventually go to the SCOTUS, but I think it's pretty clear they are intent on letting this play out in the individual states & appeals courts first.

Anyone believing the SCOTUS is eager to jump right back into this issue so soon is simply setting themselves up for disappointment.

That said, I do think this will get to the SCOTUS sooner rather than later, but not before at least 3 or 4 appeals courts have issued conflicting rulings. Likely in the 2016 term.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#19 Feb 5, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again you're being overly optimistic.
Other than wishful thinking, is there any logical reason to believe the SCOTUS wouldn't issue a stay in this case just like they did in Utah?
I agree this must eventually go to the SCOTUS, and WILL eventually go to the SCOTUS, but I think it's pretty clear they are intent on letting this play out in the individual states & appeals courts first.
Anyone believing the SCOTUS is eager to jump right back into this issue so soon is simply setting themselves up for disappointment.
That said, I do think this will get to the SCOTUS sooner rather than later, but not before at least 3 or 4 appeals courts have issued conflicting rulings. Likely in the 2016 term.
I think yo misunderstood me. As far as a stay being issued is concerned, I was speaking specifically about the judge who is now considring the case.

This won't get to SCOTUS for another 2 or 3 years.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#20 Feb 5, 2014
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I think yo misunderstood me. As far as a stay being issued is concerned, I was speaking specifically about the judge who is now considring the case.
This won't get to SCOTUS for another 2 or 3 years.
And considering the SCOTUS stepped in and issued a stay when the Utah judge didn't, I'd say the word is out.

Even the state lawyer who supports overturning the ban requested she issue a stay of her ruling to avoid the situation that happened in Utah.

Either she stays her own ruling or the 4th circuit or the SCOTUS will do it for her.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#21 Feb 5, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
And considering the SCOTUS stepped in and issued a stay when the Utah judge didn't, I'd say the word is out.
Even the state lawyer who supports overturning the ban requested she issue a stay of her ruling to avoid the situation that happened in Utah.
Either she stays her own ruling or the 4th circuit or the SCOTUS will do it for her.
I think you're wrong. I don't think that the trial judge, nor the appeals court will issue a stay, if her decision is favorable to use. We shall have to wait a few weeks and see.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#22 Feb 5, 2014
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you're wrong. I don't think that the trial judge, nor the appeals court will issue a stay, if her decision is favorable to use. We shall have to wait a few weeks and see.
I know you think I'm wrong, but I'm trying to figure out WHY you think I'm wrong.

What makes you think this judge won't issue a stay considering what happened in Utah and Oklahoma?

What makes you think the 4th circuit won't issue a stay if the judge doesn't, again considering what happened in the Utah case?

What makes you think the SCOTUS won't issue a stay AGAIN, if the judge & the 4th circuit both decide not to, considering what happened in the Utah case?

I'm just trying to figure out if you have any actual logic behind your opinion, or if it's just an uneducated guess contrary to all recent events.

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 4 GOP candidates sign anti-gay marriage pledge 11 min YouDidntBuildThat 160
News Josh Earnest blames Vetser on Congress failure ... 14 min Waste Water 2
News Religious liberty is rallying cry after gay mar... 20 min Gaybriel 531
Poll When will Hillary Clinton Be Indicted ? 50 min Fa-Foxy 69
News Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 1 hr NoahLovesU 34,808
News Clerk ordered to issue same-sex marriage licenses 1 hr goonsquad 4
News Same-sex marriage fight turns to clerk who refu... 1 hr ___Jenny___ 2,820
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 1 hr too lazy to log in 25,586
News Court: Baker who refused gay wedding cake can't... 1 hr too lazy to log in 971
News Duke freshman says Jesus forbids him from readi... 2 hr Wondering 43
More from around the web