Gay Marriage!

[Samfoslom]

Reading the tea leaves, the Court did not give us strict scrutiny, or any form of heightened scrutiny. However, Robert's dissent says he thinks the equal protection argument would be stronger if the state was trying to deny tangible benefits to same sex couples (he apparently sees civil unions as equal to marriage). Going forward, it sounds as if we may get 6-3 decisions should states try to bar adoptions by gay married couples, for example.

 

Kevin Slater

 

When the Supreme Court defines something a fundamental due process right it is a substantive right as well as a procedural right (equal protection). So the court found two separate 14th amendment grounds to sustain gay marriage. Fundamental/substantive rights get strict scrutiny. That means the court will apply strict scrutiny in future equal protection challenges to say, laws which treat gay married people as a class differently from married straight people.

[Rudynate]

Reading the tea leaves, the Court did not give us strict scrutiny, or any form of heightened scrutiny. However, Robert's dissent says he thinks the equal protection argument would be stronger if the state was trying to deny tangible benefits to same sex couples (he apparently sees civil unions as equal to marriage). Going forward, it sounds as if we may get 6-3 decisions should states try to bar adoptions by gay married couples, for example.

 

Kevin Slater

 

 

But marriage is deemed a fundamental right, thus triggering strict scrutiny. In some states, gays are considered a "suspect class," but the Supreme Court seems to be resisting adding to the the list of suspect classes at the federal level.

[Rudynate]

So when does that pastor in Texas set himself on fire?

 

I think he just meant that he wouldn't perform same-sex marriages. I don't think you can force clergy to perform same-sex marriages. It would trigger the First Amendment. A justice of the peace would be a different story. Since the Supreme Court has determined that the Constitution mandates same-sex marriage, a justice of the peace would be violating his oath to support, uphold and defend the Constitution in refusing to perform a same-sex marriage. He/she could be impeached.

[Epigonos]

Kennedy did not just "get" to write the majority decision, he chose to write it. By Supreme Court procedure the senior justice in the majority decided who writes the decision UNLESS the Chief Justice is also in the majority and then he decides. Chief Justice Roberts was in the minority and Justice Kennedy was the senior justice in the majority and thus he decided to write the majority opinion himself.

 

P.S. I didn't think it would happen the way it did. I thought they would decided against same sex marriage based on the 14th Amendment but them make it legal on the basis of the "full faith and credit clause" of the Constitution. I am most definitely going to have to trade my old crystal ball in for a new one.

[+ Funguy]

Texas Pastor Says He Will Set Himself On Fire In Protest Over Gay Marriage

 

... a former Baptist pastor from Texas, who is also against same-sex marriage, has taken it one step further - and beyond - by declaring that he will set himself on fire if the Supreme Court rules in favor of marriage equality.

 

I want to see it on the news!

[Kevin Slater]

the senior justice in the majority decided who writes the decision UNLESS the Chief Justice is also in the majority and then he decides.

 

The Chief Justice is always the senior justice, so no need for the second half of that sentence.

 

Kevin Slater

[Samfoslom]

well the term "senior justice" refers to tenure on the court. The Supreme Court Justice trumps that seniority when in the majority.

[Epigonos]

I don't quite understand your point Kevin. If the Chief Justice is NOT a concurring member of the majority he does NOT decide who writes the opinion the Senior Justice does. It is true that the Chief Justice decides who writes the decision regardless of which side he is on but ONLY for the side with which he concurs NOT the opposite side.

[Samfoslom]

yes, that's right

[+ Gar1eth]

I don't quite understand your point Kevin. If the Chief Justice is NOT a concurring member of the majority he does NOT decide who writes the opinion the Senior Justice does. It is true that the Chief Justice decides who writes the decision regardless of which side he is on but ONLY for the side with which he concurs NOT the opposite side.

 

Don't you mean the Chief Justice or the Senior Justice assigns the justice whose clerks write the opinion?:D

 

Gman

[+ Gar1eth]

Texas Pastor Says He Will Set Himself On Fire In Protest Over Gay Marriage

The pastor made the bold declaration during a conference call with a former Virginia GOP politician that he would rather burn himself to death than sanction same-sex marriage.

By Irene Cabrera | Jun 24, 2015 11:40 PM EDT

 

http://images.hngn.com/data/images/full/100857/rick-scarborough.jpg?w=650

Texas pastor Rick Scarborough made the bold declaration that he would rather burn to death than sanction same-sex marriage. (Photo : Getty Images)

Just two weeks ago, a Christian couple in Australia vowed to divorce if same-sex marriage is legalized in their country.

However, a former Baptist pastor from Texas, who is also against same-sex marriage, has taken it one step further - and beyond - by declaring that he will set himself on fire if the Supreme Court rules in favor of marriage equality.

 

I want to see it on the news!

 

We Texans are known for our friendliness in general and our deep love and sense of camaraderie with fellow Texans. With that in mind I'd definitely like to help out Pastor Scarborough achieve his goals.

 

http://topclassactionscom.c.presscdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Products_Banana_Boat_Sport_Performance_Sunscreen.jpg

 

 

 

 

Gman

[+ deej]

Don't you mean the Chief Justice or the Senior Justice assigns the justice whose clerks write the opinion?:D

 

Not necessarily. The clerks have their hands in, for sure, to dot the i's and cross the t's but the Justices do much of the writing on their own. During one of her interviews, RGB actually mentioned she'd been up all night the night before because her (SCATHING) dissent HAD to get done!

[+ WilliamM]

Not necessarily. The clerks have their hands in, for sure, to dot the i's and cross the t's but the Justices do much of the writing on their own. During one of her interviews, RGB actually mentioned she'd been up all night the night before because her (SCATHING) dissent HAD to get done!

 

You are right, of course. However:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clay_v._United_States

 

See Clay v. United States for a situation where a clerk to Justice Harlan may have changed a critical vote.

[+ deej]

So when does that pastor in Texas set himself on fire?

 

And, of course, all those people who said they'd leave the country if gay marriage became law are free to go now. Syria would be a good gay-hating destination.

 

Wave bye, y'all.

[Steven_Draker]

http://www.pictures88.com/p/congratulations/congratulations_001.jpg

[+ quoththeraven]

The majority opinion punted on the issue of the standard to be applied. Sometimes the Court will use the most deferential standard (rational basis) and decide that even that's not met, but they didn't do that here. The analysis pretty much begins and ends with marriage being a fundamental right. That's not a new idea. What's new is conceptualizing marriage (and family) in non-heteronormative terms.

 

For in-depth informed and snarky commentary on the opinions, majority and dissenting, take a look at Courtney Milan's Twitter. Milan clerked for Justices O'Connor and Kennedy, so she knows whereof she speaks. Among other things, she notes that Alito's dissent amounts to "But this means those of us insisting on keeping marriage traditional will be viewed as bigots!" She also suggests that the lack of a standard may be due to bridging differences in the majority -- that some may have wanted to base the decision on equal protection grounds and others on due process.

[+ WilliamM]

Among other things, she notes that Alito's dissent amounts to "But this means those of us insisting on keeping marriage traditional will be viewed as bigots!"

 

I was politically aware for most of the time Earl Warren was Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Considering the terrrible names that Warren was called, I do not have much sympathy for Justice Alito's dissent (based on Ms. Milan's tweet).

[down_to_business]

I saw the news early this morning. I didn't expect it to move me the way it did, but I actually had to fight back the tears.

 

Justice Kennedy is a good man. Props to the 4 liberals on the court as well. And whether you like them or not, Obama/Biden have been wonderful to the gay community.

[+ purplekow]

So can we finally stop calling it "Gay Marriage" and simply call it marriage. Thank you

[loverboy95]

This is a beautiful day in our country and I am glad I now have the option to get married in my own state if I ever decide to do so!

[Kevin Slater]

http://images.politico.com/global/2015/06/26/20150626_white_house_rainbow_3_ap_1160_956x519.jpg

 

Kevin Slater

[bigvalboy]

http://images.politico.com/global/2015/06/26/20150626_white_house_rainbow_3_ap_1160_956x519.jpg

 

Kevin Slater

 

Now that is just truly amazing, and on that powerful and poignant image I think I will retire for the evening. Thanks for posting this Kevin.

[Rudynate]

So can we finally stop calling it "Gay Marriage" and simply call it marriage. Thank you

 

With pleasure. Now that there's no need to draw a distinction, why would you?

[tedbear]

The fact that it has been a bad week for Scalia makes it a great week for humanity.

 

Ironically enough "Antonin Scalia" anagrams to "I sanction anal."

[Kevin Slater]

Ironically enough "Antonin Scalia" anagrams to "I sanction anal."

 

Fun: if you google anagram, it suggests Did you mean: nag a ram.

 

Kevin Slater