Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Supreme Court wipes out Proposition 8's gay marriage ban
MercuryNews.com ^ | June 26, 2013 | Howard Mintz

Posted on 06/26/2013 7:41:40 AM PDT by Deo volente

The U.S. Supreme Court today paved the way for same-sex couples to marry soon in California, effectively leaving intact a lower-court ruling that struck down the state's voter-approved ban on gay marriage.

In a ruling that assures further legal battles, the high court found that backers of Proposition 8 did not have the legal right to defend the voter-approved gay marriage ban in place of the governor and attorney general, who have refused to press appeals of a federal judge's 2010 ruling finding the law unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court ruling, which found it had no legal authority to decide the merits of a challenge to Proposition 8, sends the case back to that original decision -- and the only question now is how quickly same-sex couples can marry and whether that ruling will have immediate statewide effect.

The 5-4 ruling was written by Chief Justice John Roberts.

(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: activistcourt; californication; cultureofcorruption; doma; homosexualagenda; judicialactivism; judicialtyranny; maninblackdresses; noaccountability; obamanation; prop8; proposition8; ruling; scotus; sexpositiveagenda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-312 next last

1 posted on 06/26/2013 7:41:40 AM PDT by Deo volente
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

Gawd...Roberts has gone full-blown lib.


2 posted on 06/26/2013 7:42:31 AM PDT by Timber Rattler (Just say NO! to RINOS and the GOP-E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

Horrible. Not a surprise though.


3 posted on 06/26/2013 7:42:45 AM PDT by ColdOne (I miss my poochie... Tasha 2000~3/14/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

The incredible shrinking American culture continues.


4 posted on 06/26/2013 7:43:35 AM PDT by Huskrrrr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler

Never would I defend Roberts after what he did on Obamacare, however, same Roberts joined and wrote the 5-4 decision on the Voting Rights Act, which is the correct position. He did not join the 4 full-blown libs. Just stating a fact...


5 posted on 06/26/2013 7:45:28 AM PDT by txrangerette ("...hold to the truth; speak without fear". - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

I remember when people used to think Roberts was a conservative. Now if you just lie to him, he’ll vote your way.


6 posted on 06/26/2013 7:45:47 AM PDT by Colonel_Flagg (Blather. Reince. Repeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

From what I can gather this was decided on who did and did not have standing to bring case.

Also in this decision the 5-4 split was NOT idealogical.


7 posted on 06/26/2013 7:45:57 AM PDT by SE Mom (Proud mom of an Iraq war combat vet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

You can’t vote FOR something and then elect crooked politicians who are against you on that same issue. It’s just dumb. Elections do have consequences. The California politicians pissed all over the California voters who elected them.


8 posted on 06/26/2013 7:46:50 AM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Osama tried and failed. Obama got it done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler

Could Harriet Miers have possibly been any worse??


9 posted on 06/26/2013 7:47:31 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SE Mom

So, who DID have standing to bring the case?


10 posted on 06/26/2013 7:47:40 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("You can obseve a lot just by watchin'." - Yogi Berra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente
In a ruling that assures further legal battles, the high court found that backers of Proposition 8 did not have the legal right to defend the voter-approved gay marriage ban in place of the governor and attorney general, who have refused to press appeals of a federal judge's 2010 ruling finding the law unconstitutional.

In a nutshell - Jerry Brown and a single judge have more power than the population of California. Citizens have "no legal standing" to appeal the judges ruling. That's what this decision means. I think this is far reaching and not good.

11 posted on 06/26/2013 7:48:09 AM PDT by InterceptPoint (If I had a tag line this is where you would find it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler


Is anyone surprised about how Roberts voted?
12 posted on 06/26/2013 7:48:10 AM PDT by jimbo123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Huskrrrr

You guys finally ready to get fedgov out of the marriage sanctioning and subsidizing business yet? Or are you hoping a few more elections and you’ll be able to get big government to get rid of the strings attached to all those favors you let it do for you?


13 posted on 06/26/2013 7:48:14 AM PDT by Orangedog (An optimist is someone who tells you to 'cheer up' when things are going his way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

A technical ruling on standing as a result of the Governator and CA AG refusing to do their jobs and follow the results of a proposition election. Given the recent choice by the LDS on the Boy Scouts gay youth rule, it’s unlikely the LDS will be a factor in the same way they were in the first Prop.8 battles.


14 posted on 06/26/2013 7:48:16 AM PDT by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente
Well, it could have been worse.... The homo's had hoped...even expected...that the court would find some innate constitutional right to gay marriage, (see Abortion) that would apply to all states and wipe out all gay marriage bans. Although, they got half a loaf with DOMA (probably a bit more) they are all still upset that they didn't get the whole loaf....
15 posted on 06/26/2013 7:48:19 AM PDT by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler

Perhaps we have a hint of what the NSA has learned about Roberts and how he is controlled.


16 posted on 06/26/2013 7:48:31 AM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

Twice today.

TWICE TODAY.

Legally passed laws BY THE PEOPLE

were over turned.


17 posted on 06/26/2013 7:48:42 AM PDT by 2banana (My common ground with terrorists - they want to die for islam and we want to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne; Huskrrrr

This ruling is on a technical ground, I believe. The state of CA refused to defend this prop even though it passed. So this organization that opposes same-sex marriage defended the prop. The ruling is that this was not valid because this group had no standing to substitute for the state’s lack of defense.

The resulting demise of the prop is terrible, agreed.

But this was a legalism, not a moralism, or so it claims.


18 posted on 06/26/2013 7:49:56 AM PDT by txrangerette ("...hold to the truth; speak without fear". - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog

What’s your brilliant plan with spousal visas? I want to hear it.


19 posted on 06/26/2013 7:50:00 AM PDT by JCBreckenridge (Un Pere, Une Mere, C'est elementaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

The citizens of this country do not have a say any longer.

Laws passed by us are not relevant.

We are ruled.

That is all.


20 posted on 06/26/2013 7:50:12 AM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler

Roberts looks gay so it would surprise me one bit.


21 posted on 06/26/2013 7:51:09 AM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

So, the voters are chopped liver.


22 posted on 06/26/2013 7:51:09 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
So, who DID have standing to bring the case?

My guess: the same people who have standing to challenge Obama's eligibility.

23 posted on 06/26/2013 7:51:36 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente
Nice to know that the vote of we, the people, doesn’t count. Thank you, Supreme Court.
24 posted on 06/26/2013 7:51:38 AM PDT by fatnotlazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler

Roberts was the only thing I had left to thank Bush for. So I thought.


25 posted on 06/26/2013 7:51:40 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente
What can I say! Ain't he/she cute?


26 posted on 06/26/2013 7:51:48 AM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (Sometimes you need 7+ more ammo. LOTS MORE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
So, who DID have standing to bring the case?

Apparently, not the over 7 million Californians who voted for it.

27 posted on 06/26/2013 7:51:57 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Huskrrrr

Marriage is a LICENSING issue, which falls to the States under the Reserved Powers of the Constitution. The Defense of Marriage Act attempts to override that. In addition, the Federalization of this issue has helped the Gay Marriage lobby in their push to have marriage recognized as a RIGHT. If that is accomplished, what’s to stop the Federal Gov’t from trying to force religious institutions to perform these same sex marriages? They’re doing the same thing with contraception and Obamacare. Leave it to the states and let the chips fall where they may.


28 posted on 06/26/2013 7:52:44 AM PDT by cumbo78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

Votes by the citizens of America count for absolutely nothing.

The SCOTUS is an ass!


29 posted on 06/26/2013 7:52:50 AM PDT by IbJensen (Liberals are like Slinkies, good for nothing, but you smile as you push them down the stairs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

From what I’ve heard, this case can be taken up by any authority, even a town clerk, who legally has standing in the government. So, technically, we start over again.


30 posted on 06/26/2013 7:52:51 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler

And Scalia too?


31 posted on 06/26/2013 7:52:52 AM PDT by bigdaddy45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001

Roberts looks gay so it would not surprise me one bit.


32 posted on 06/26/2013 7:53:34 AM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Your “nutshell” is pretty spot on.

There is a tenant in judicial review that if you can avoid making a decision on Constitutional grounds, and can find other dispositive grounds, that is how you decide the case. That’s what happened here.

The worst part is, now that it is done, the case WILL be back (Full Faith & Credit probably) and I would bet pretty much anything that SCOTUS approves gay marriage nationwide.


33 posted on 06/26/2013 7:53:49 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Huskrrrr
The incredible shrinking American culture continues.

Shrinking good, enlarging EVIL. No other word for it.
God made Adam and EVE, NOT Adam and STeve.

34 posted on 06/26/2013 7:53:59 AM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

Laws passed by the people, as you put it, don’t make them constitutional...just sayin’...


35 posted on 06/26/2013 7:54:03 AM PDT by JerseyRepub (I voted for John Kerry before I voted against him!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente
This is what we get when we FAIL to OBEY God.
For it is written: Those who support homosexuals are against our Heavenly Father and His Son Jesus Christ.
These anti Christ people only bring destruction on us ALL.
I have NO sympathy for homosexuals!

Homosexuality is a "Mark" of disobedience.
Someone once asked The answer is in the definition of "REPROBATE". And the reason"why" is given in the Bible.

God has a cure for homosexuals.

"Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect
that God is just,
that his justice cannot sleep forever."


36 posted on 06/26/2013 7:54:17 AM PDT by Yosemitest (It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog
You guys finally ready to get fedgov out of the marriage sanctioning and subsidizing business yet? Or are you hoping a few more elections and you’ll be able to get big government to get rid of the strings attached to all those favors you let it do for you?

I don't think you quite understand what just happened.

37 posted on 06/26/2013 7:54:20 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: chris37

You grasp the truth of the matter.


38 posted on 06/26/2013 7:54:52 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

The voters are chopped liver and elected congress members are chopped liver, depending on the case. Sometimes, states are chopped liver. This SCOTUS sure has a lack of consistency.


39 posted on 06/26/2013 7:54:57 AM PDT by ilgipper (Obama is proving that very bad ideas can be wrapped up in pretty words)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

It was the California Attorney General who was to be defending the law.

BUt the AG was pro gay, so he dropped it.


40 posted on 06/26/2013 7:55:06 AM PDT by Alex in chains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: fatnotlazy

We are now officially a judicial oligarchy.


41 posted on 06/26/2013 7:55:09 AM PDT by ZirconEncrustedTweezers (The average American voter is an idiot. Which is how the Dems want it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette
The ruling is that this was not valid because this group had no standing to substitute for the state’s lack of defense.

It's hard to make this case when the California Supreme Ct, Judge Walkers federal court, and the Ninth Circus ALL deemed the defender of Prop 8 has having standing. How did the Supremes go off the rails so badly on this?

42 posted on 06/26/2013 7:55:58 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cumbo78

“If that is accomplished, what’s to stop the Federal Gov’t from trying to force religious institutions to perform these same sex marriages?”

My worst fear. Will my pastor have to choose between jail and freedom to practice his religion?


43 posted on 06/26/2013 7:56:08 AM PDT by Huskrrrr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

Well, and while I find these rulings terrible and horrifying, that’s kind of what Supreme Courts do in applying their take on a Constitution. Not all legally passed law stand. It’s kind of the system we have.

We don’t have a majority rule system and never have.


44 posted on 06/26/2013 7:56:15 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
So, who DID have standing to bring the case?

The State of California. However they chose not to challenge and, unless they are ready to open up the court to suits from individuals and groups without standing, they had to rule this way.

So don't blame the Court in this one. Blame the administration in California, and the people who elected them.

45 posted on 06/26/2013 7:56:44 AM PDT by newheart (The worst thing the Left ever did was to convince the world it was not a religion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

the institution of marriage pre-dates recorded history and in all that time, it has always been between men and women. There is nothing unconstitutional about wanting to maintain that 20,000 year precedent.


46 posted on 06/26/2013 7:57:25 AM PDT by RC one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente
Roberts is completely compromised, IMHO. He leads another shameful and sick decision. T

he people's representatives create a law with a large majority. A federal judge rules against it. The people themselves voted for a constitutional amendment punctuating the original law, again by a large majority.

Now more federal judges are turning that over.

We are witnessing two things.

1) The tyranny of specific judiciary members..co-opting the will of the people which is lawfully taken according to the laws of their soveriegn state.
2) The compromising of those same judiciary by a criminal, thugish enterprise in this current administration which is, IMHO, either bribing or coersing them to vote as they direct.

This will end badly for those law breakers and oath breakers. It may take a while yet...but if this continues, we will see a remedy similar to what our founders imposed on the King of england.

A MODERN DECLARATION OF LIBERTY

47 posted on 06/26/2013 7:57:35 AM PDT by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

It is a decision that precludes the people from passing a referendum that the executive branch opposes because the opinion seems to say that only the governor and attorney general of a state have standing to defend it. I don’t know the consequence of an executive branch decision not to defend a law duly and validly passed by a state legislature.


48 posted on 06/26/2013 7:57:39 AM PDT by Piranha (We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente
Next up....Churches will be forced to marry homosexuals or lose their tax exempt status. Move over minorities, gay is the new civil liberty.
49 posted on 06/26/2013 7:57:43 AM PDT by liberalh8ter (The only difference between flash mob 'urban yutes' and U.S. politicians is the hoodies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

Can anyone on this board tell me with a straight face that they are the least bit surprised by this judicial overreach?

If so, I have a bridge or two I’d like to sell you.


50 posted on 06/26/2013 7:57:54 AM PDT by ssaftler (Oh, hell YEAH!!!! This is absolutely Obama's fault)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-312 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson