Posted on 02/06/2012 12:07:03 PM PST by willamedwardwallace
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court is ready to announce its ruling on whether California’s same-sex ["]marriage["] ban violates the ["]constitutional rights["] of [sodomites].
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Monday a three-judge panel plans to publish its long-awaited opinion on Tuesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The problem is, this have the effect of overturning traditional marriage laws in all of the Ninth Circuit in one shot.
So... the 9th Circus will nullify the constitutional ban on homo “marriage” as “unconstitutional.”
9th Circuit - all I had to read to know the decision they have made.
Californians get back doored....
This will be one more 9th Circus UltraLiberal Ruling to to the SCOTUS.
They can rule whatever they want, the people have spoken. This is not any of the court’s business.
the constitutional amendment is unconstitutional, the will of the people and Govt gets it power from the people etc etc etc
are all to be ignored will be the ruling, and when you have judges now openly saying our constitution should not be repeated, it is old and there is no chance in it for social justice then what is the point of the law now.
just go out and have anarchy and after the ruling the homosexuals and the left fringe element will be saying this is the right decision, the GOP will stay silent and they wonder why many of us will not get behind the likes of Romney
It would be funny if a large group of people supporting prop 8 would gather around the courthouse and start yelling: “This is what democracy looks like” over and over again.
Of course, the Dims only like democracy if it produces something they like, if it doesn’t it goes to the tyrants in black to declare the wants of the majority null and void. “Democracy for me but not for thee” should be the mantra of the dims.
how on earth can a constitutional amendment backed with the people saying so is unconstitutional.
This is blatant up yours to the laws of this country and this is what happens when those in power get a chance to put people on the bench.
Hi Romney this is why we are not with you seeing as you put liberals on the bench too
LLS
Pun intended?
And the Black-Robed Priests discard the will of the people. Again.
how on earth can a constitutional amendment backed with the people saying so is unconstitutional.
____________________________________________________________
If a state constitutional amendment conflicts with Federal constitution, the Federal constitution trumps it.
As an (extreme hypothetical) example. Let’s say the handful of neo-Nazis running around in Idaho actually managed to effect the amendment of the Idaho state constitution by a majority of the popular vote, said amendment calling for the physical extermination of “Jews and their Zionist allies” within the Idaho state boundaries. Quite aside from the mass-murder aspect, this (hypothetical) amendment would immediately conflict with the Federal First Amendment, free practice of religion. In that case, the SCOTUS (or 9th Circuit or whomever) would rule that the Idaho state amendment is in conflict with the Federal constitution, and therefore the Federal constitution takes precedent, nullifying the Idaho state amendment as unconstitutional (Federally speaking).
Sorry.....long-winded answer, and yes, an extreme hypothetical situation. But, that’s the answer as to how a constitutional amendment can be ruled unconstitutional.
“how on earth can a constitutional amendment backed with the people saying so is unconstitutional.”
The ammendment was to the California constitution. I haven’t been following this, but I assume that if a Federal court is involved...then they are saying the ammendment to the California Constitution violated the U.S. Constitution.
It will be interesting to see how the SCOTUS rules on this. I don’t see how that can dodge it. They have already, I believe, upheld DOMA, so they should overturn the 9th as is usual. I pray they do.
Yup ... I read a while back that around 94% of the 9th Circuit decisions are overturned by SCOTUS. But the downside is, SCOTUS doesn't accept every case sent up to them. So we'll see.
This case will not be, ultimately, decided until Obama is re-elected and has appointed at least two more justices to SCOTUS.
and then that crowd takes over the court house, screaming this is what democracy looks like.
What utter nonsense all of this is.
This has been decided on twice now and still these people who prefer very unnatural bizarre unhealthy sex try and over rule the laws.
Watch as some homosexual activist now states the 9th got it right but they will ignore all of what the constitution states, what the laws of the state say etc.
This is why it is so important to get a President in Nov who understand social and fiscal issues and the laws of this country something which the establishment elitist forget by backing Romney
It will be interesting to see how the SCOTUS rules on this. I don’t see how that can dodge it.
______________________________________________________
SCOTUS could simply decide that this is a state constitutional issue, and that a (presumptive) ruling against Prop. 8 by the 9th Circuit is only in regard to a “local” issue. Basically, they could just refuse to hear the case, thereby allowing the 9th Circuit’s ruling to stand. And seeing as how (IMO) the justices may have no burning desire to open this particular can of worms, I wouldn’t be terribly shocked by something like that.
In the longer run, whether through this case or another from somewhere else over the next decade or so, I still expect this issue will be settled one way or another by the Supreme Court. And how that goes is anyone’s guess.........
Ninth Jerkit Court of Schlemiels. The Stench From The Bench Is Making Me Clench.
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.