U.S. Supreme Court wipes out Proposition 8's gay marriage ban

MercuryNews.com ^ | June 26, 2013 | Howard Mintz

[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.

[Einherjar]

Congratulations sodomy enthusiasts.

[rollo tomasi]

I used to be a Libertarian, then I turned 25, quit smoking pot, studied history, quit deifying our hypocritical Founding Fathers, understood reality, understood that the Spirit and Law of our Constitution is long gone, and bought enough marshmallows for when society starts to "burn" again.

To a libertarian, reality is hypocritical and should be shunned. BTW, the "war on drugs" is really a farce, so libertarians, you got that right.

[fatima]

I hate to say it but America is going to be punished.Sad day for our Kids.Very bad message.

[massmike]

So let me see if I understand:
The Supremes ruled that DOMA was unconstitutional,in part because it prohibited states from making their own marriage laws,BUT,once a state DOES make it’s own marriage laws,as with Prop 8 defining marriage as one man-one woman ONLY,then the gays can just judge-shop until they find a judge that rules in their favor,and the people of that state are told they have NO standing to challenge.

Do I have that right?

[JCBreckenridge]

Yeah, it’s really a farce when you’re fighting to keep your kiddo off drugs long enough for them to get a decent job and an education.

[JCBreckenridge]

No. Scalia had a scathing dissent.

[Rokurota]

Both Roberts and Scalia dissented in the DOMA case. Then both Roberts and Scalia voted for the majority opinion in the Prop 8 case. They voted the same in both cases. If someone states that Roberts has gone full blown lib because of these two cases, then Scalia apparently has, too.

[dfwgator]

Obama’s got the goods on them.

[Rokurota]

Maybe...but they both voted opposite of what Obama would have on DOMA.

[TangledUpInBlue]

Exactly. And by the courts writing, how would anyone but them be “harmed” by same sex marriage? That lack of harm, and therefore standing before SCOTUS essentially guarantees that the Appeals Court decision will never be overturned.

[JCBreckenridge]

Rather than making terrible arguments, why not cite Scalia’s dissent?

[JCBreckenridge]

Children?

[Rokurota]

Since when is citing a fact (such as both Scalia and
Roberts dissented) become a terrible argument?

[rollo tomasi]

Scalia sided with the anti-Prop 8 supporters along with Roberts. Scalia and Roberts sided with DOMA but Kennedy switched because he did not want to look like a hypocrite in his “States” right argument (Concerning DOMA) that made no sense at all from a Constitutional standpoint (Equality concerning States that approve homosexual marriage, but ignores States that do not for some unknown reason).

Also ignores a bunch of other Fed/tax laws that defines marriage (There goes your "protect the Constitution" you closet pro-homosexual rights libertarians). Somehow those are allowed to stay, while the “goodies” are distributed.

[OneWingedShark]

How do you fight the 16th Amendment and the Social Security act? By voting for Libertarians? Yeah, that is a real effective tactic.

Show me how it's any worse than voting for a Republican. Seriously.
Libertarians want government out of every nook and cranny of life; I can work with that... but the government's selectively enforced 'laws' on anything and everything, yeah, you have a good (sarcasm) chance there (video: part 1, part 2).

[little jeremiah]

I cannot undesrtand legalese, but your summary seems to be what I can glean.

In other words, the SCOTUS should be named SCROTUM (except for the few who got it right on both votes). These are my conclusions:

They want states’ rights? Let’s give them states’ rights up their okole! Everything not mandated in the Constitution for the fedgov is now up for grabs! And the judiciary is rotten to the core! Jury nullification - judge nullification - we need to spread this message all over the place! Why should our rights be perverted and stolen by homosexual judges, immoral judges, idiot judges, bought and sold, bribed and blackmailed judges, crazy judges, and so on?? Why? We need to fight against this tyranny of vile judges.

Second, we need God’s hand. I’ve already spent extra time today in prayer. This hurtling into sodom and tyranny cannot continue.

[little jeremiah]

Your argument does not nullify the fact that marriage has been recongized LEGALLY for thousands of years, whoever does the official marriage ceremony.

[little jeremiah]

The homosexual trolls are out in full force on this thread. Either homo trolls or liberaltarians. Same thing practically.

[dfwgator]

The Viking Kitties are going to be working overtime today.

[little jeremiah]

Active prayer - for one thing, I am driven to prayer lately and today even more so.

I made a comment a few minutes ago about judge nullification - we are now in a double tyranny - of a corrupt and powermade fedgov, and corrupt and powermad judiciary.