LGBT
Related: About this forumWhat would be the result if the Supreme Court affirms Prop 8?
I would think that then the issue would be decided on a state by state basis, leaving us in for the long haul.
But, if the Supreme Court slaps Prop 8 down, does that make same sex marraige legal in all 50 states?
xchrom
(108,903 posts)If it's as wide spread as Lawrence - I think the supremes might kick it back some how rather than wade in.
Just my 2 cents.
hedgehog
(36,286 posts)do is to let the lower court decision stand. In that case, I'm thinking that the ruling may apply only in California or only in that circuit.
I figure someone in the group here has a better handle on this than I do.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)You are probably right that any ruling will be limited to California, but they could make a broader ruling and say bans on gay marriage violate the Constitution effectively making gay marriage legal everywhere. I think such a ruling is unlikely but not impossible, I think the chances that Kennedy will side with us for a 5-4 decision that will legalize gay marriage in California are quite good I am not as confident that they will tackle the broader issue of gay marriage but instead focus on the more narrow issue of the 9th circuit ruling.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Win or lose the decision would likely only effect California, however it is not unheard of for the Supreme Court to make a ruling that is broader in scope than the case that was brought before them so it is not impossible that a ruling could legalize gay marriage in all 50 states it all depends on how broad the Supreme Court decides to go in their decision. I don't think our chances in the Supreme Court are as bad as people assume, while Kennedy may be a right-winger on most issues, he showed in his Lawrence v. Texas opinion that he does support gay rights and there is a very good chance that he will side with us this time.
hedgehog
(36,286 posts)William769
(55,144 posts)That would cover all 50 States and nullify DOMA.
They can't say it's unconstitutional in one place and not another.
Thats how I see it.
Also the way the way the 9th circuit worded it, I don't think it gives SCOTUS any wiggle room. But then again I've been wrong before.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)If they rule directly on the gay marriage question then yes it would legalize gay marriage nationally, if they only choose to rule on the logistics of the case and whether it was handled properly at the lower levels then the ruling would be more limited in scope.
William769
(55,144 posts)All I know for sure is there is a whole lot of confusion over a very simple issue.
William769
(55,144 posts)Expert analyses of the Ninth Circuits Prop. 8 ruling Tuesday have been legion throughout the day, though one from Williams Institute legal director Jennifer Pizer stood out as particularly thoughtful. The former Lambda Legal marriage project director wrote earlier today:
The decision breaks new ground because its the first federal appeals court to strike down a states exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage. But it doesnt break new ground legally. Instead, the rulings close application of Justice Kennedys 1996 equal protection analysis (in the Romer v. Evans, Colorado Amendment 2 case) both makes it less likely that the Supreme Court will grant review, and more likely that that plaintiffs would win if the case does go up. Justice Kennedy is generally seen as the key vote, and todays decision looking at another state ballot measure uses his 1996 analysis as a roadmap.
By deciding that California has no legitimate reasons for allowing same-sex couples all the same rights and obligations as different-sex couples, but withholding the equal dignity of marriage, the decision has important implications for other states doing the same. At present, there are nine of them with either a civil union law (DE, HI, IL, NJ, RI) or a broad domestic partnership law like Californias (CA, NV, OR, WA). Todays decision doesnt mean those laws are automatically invalid, because it focused closely on specific facts and dynamics of the Prop 8 campaign. That focus on facts unique to California is another reason the Supreme Court might decide not to hear it. And in any challenge to a another states marriage restriction any defenders of the restriction would have a chance to try to show reasons to retain it, aiming to persuade other judges to agree with Judge Smiths dissent rather than the todays majority opinion.
http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2012/02/07/An_LGBT_Law_Experts_Take_on_the_Prop_8_Decision/
Gman
(24,780 posts)Which opens up a whole new can of worms give the SCOTUS has worked so hard to limit who can sue.
As someone said above, it's very possible Kenedy votes to uphold the 9th which would be a grand slam by also relaxing who can and cannot sue.
My guess is the SCOTUS punts and decides not to hear it. The RW and corporations have too much to lose.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)then they have green-lighted any attempts of legislatures or the voters to restrict equal marriage. I don't think the reich-wing has the votes for it, though. Anthony Kennedy has already shown us where he stands on freedom.
However, I do fear the backlash from a SCOTUS decision. When Loving vs. Virginia struck down bans on interracial marriage, very few places in the US had such laws, and even fewer enforced them universally. Also, nearly all those laws dated from the post-Civil War era, and were about a century old as of the Loving decision. At this point, a clear majority of the states have constitutions rather recently stained by discrimination.
Clearly, Roe vs. Wade did not quiet the issue of abortion rights in this country, forty years later, the battles still rage on. I would hate to think that the battle for marriage equality would somehow still be something that divides Americans down the middle in 2050.
I am the OP
(18 posts)which are used to jerk people around on both sides and simply distract? Like DADT, I mean.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)It would likely spur similar legislation/court rulings in other states.