Just A Reminder
Please Don't Forget
To Donate To FR
This Quarter
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Posted on 11/06/2014 2:03:29 PM PST by reaganaut1
By a two-to-one vote, a federal appeals court in Cincinnati upheld the right of states to ban same-sex marriage, overturning lower court decisions in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee that found such restrictions to be unconstitutional.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Since this was just a 3 judge ruling, I assume the Scotus will tell them to have the full court vote. I'd still not be surprised to have the bans upheld.
I'm told that the US Supreme Court outranks states, but that the circuit and district courts are only advisory to the states. Therefore, in states where the ban has been struck down by lower courts, the state must take their rulings into account, but they can disagree until there is a definitive ruling from Scotus.
What will Kennedy rule?
It's obvious now that grave social disruption will result from gay advocacy entering into a culture/legal war with religion. My own cousin, a magistrate in N Carolina, has been forced to resign rather than violate his religious conscience. This religious test to hold office is wrong. Taking people to court for their religious beliefs is wrong. We have an amendment that says they can believe whatever about God that they want, and they can PRACTICE (Exercise) that religious belief, and that GOVERNMENT can't tell them they can't.
Now, Judge Kennedy, does the premier right in the premier amendment stand or does some vague derived interpretation about equality under the law, designed to protect blacks, trump a clearly expressed freedom in the first amendment?
Scotus has already tipped its hat as to which way it will rule — against the Constitution.
Could be Breaking??
YES!!!!
Corporations should have the right to marry.
“Yes, the Supremes will have to rule now. Of course we know how they will rule, but make them do it.”
Whenever a SCOTUS justice is appointed and confirmed by the Senate. They should have to then be confirmed, at the next general election, by the people. If not they are immediately removed from the bench. Then every 6 years after their confirmation vote of the people (IF confirmed) they should be subject to a reconfirmation vote.
Most states require their State Supremes to be sustained by the people on a regular basis. They same should be done for the SCOTUS. I would set it up so that it wouldn’t just be a “popular vote” total for the entire country...but do it on an “electorial” basis similar to the POTUS election...except that the vote in each congressional district would be what would count. IF a justic does not get greater than 50% of the vote in 50% of congressional districts....they should immediately lose their seat.
Make judges accountable to the electorate. I hate to have to do this for I would like to think justices are above “politics”, but the reality is that they are not. So, they are unelected officials making “political” decisions with no recourse. This is just plain wrong.
Yes, since they have appointed themselves as our black robed politicians then they should face a vote. Otherwise they stand as dictators.
I think Judge Roy Moore, the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court will resign before he enforces queer “marriage” on the people of Alabama.
Moore is a true Christian.
He spoke to our Tea Party group about 3 years ago. My husband and I picked him up and returned him to the airport, so we got to spend 4 hours with him in the car.
He is a blessing.
Yes me too. And what a tragedy.
Come on, 5th Circuit!!!
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
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.