9th US Circuit Court Of Appeals To Decide On Hearing Prop 8 Case
The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals has stated that they will announce on 5 June 2012 whether or not the will reconsider a ruling by the three-judge panel regarding their earlier ruling that upheld the ruling by Judge Vaughn Walker striking down Prop 8. Supporters of the ban on same-sex marriage opted to petition the full court to review the ... (more)
Join the discussion below, or Read more at lezgetreal.com.
“ WOOF !”
Since: Oct 10
#1 Jun 4, 2012
I hope they decline to hear it. I don't think SCOTUS will hear an appeal either if it's brought to them.
“WAY TO GO”
Since: Mar 11
#2 Jun 4, 2012
My Bold predication is they don't allow the en blanc hearing.
What's more is they have made this decision knowing what SCOTUS is probably already on board with......but it really is just my opinion and I have been wrong before.
#3 Jun 5, 2012
I wonder how the recent first circuit analysis will come into play...
""In reaching our judgment, we do not rely upon the charge that DOMA's hidden but dominant purpose was hostility to homosexuality."
"Preserving this institution is not the same as "mere moral disapproval of an excluded group," Lawrence, 539 U.S. at 585 (O'Connor, J., concurring), and that is singularly so in this case given the range of bipartisan support for the statute."
"For 150 years, this desire to maintain tradition would alone have been justification enough for almost any statute. This judicial deference has a distinguished lineage, including such figures as Justice Holmes, the second Justice Harlan, and Judges Learned Hand and Henry Friendly."
Given the Prop 8 case assumes bigotry, I would argue it conflicts directly with Lawrence, and the fact that maintaining tradition is a proper aim..
Also, "Baker is precedent binding on us unless repudiated by subsequent Supreme Court precedent. Hicks v. Miranda, 422 U.S. 332,344 (1975). Following Baker, "gay rights" claims prevailed in several well known decisions, Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558(2003), and Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S.620 (1996),4 but neither
mandates that the Constitution requires states to permit same-sex marriages. A Supreme Court summary dismissal "prevent[s] lower courts from coming to opposite conclusions on the precise issues presented and necessarily decided by those actions." Mandel v. Bradley, 432 U.S. 173, 176 (1977)(per curiam). Baker does not resolve our own case but it does limit the arguments to ones that do not presume or rest on a constitutional right to same-sex marriage."
The first circuit made many predictions about what the scotus will do, and the 9th may be watching...
Add your comments below
|Idaho can keep data on animals tracked illegall...||Feb 15||Birdzilla||3|
|ICE chief: 9th Circuit partly to blame for rise...||Feb 2||Wildchild||2|
|Court: Immigrant children don't have right to f...||Jan 30||OneWomynRiot||2|
|White House will ask Supreme Court to end DACA ...||Jan '18||CodeTalker||33|
|Trump administration will ask Supreme Court to ...||Jan '18||spytheweb||2|
|Eight Times U.S. Judges Squashed Arizona's Atte... (Apr '16)||Jan '18||AIPAC yidfellas||5|
|Government seeks change to order lifting Trump ...||Dec '17||Ronald Reagan||2|
Find what you want!
Search Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Forum Now
Copyright © 2018 Topix LLC