Judge denies bid to stop gay marriages Massachusetts)

The Boston Globe ^ | 5/13/04 | Ken Maguire, Associated Press Writer

[maryz]

BOSTON -- A federal judge Thursday rejected a last-minute bid by conservative groups to block the nation's first state-sanctioned gay marriages from taking place in Massachusetts on Monday. U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro said the state's high court acted within its authority in interpreting the Massachusetts Constitution.

The plaintiffs immediately announced they would take their case to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals -- and to the Supreme Court if necessary. The 1st Circuit agreed to review the case on an expedited basis.

[maryz]

I had hoped for better things from Tauro. Yesterday I posted that he is not demonstrably insane. Perhaps just weary.

[EGPWS]

Can one say, "a massive Massachusetts exodus after the forthcoming massive Massachusetts influx"?

[maryz]

Should it get to the Supreme Court, there may not be anywhere to go.

[maryz]

That court "has the authority to interpret, and reinterpret, if necessary, the term marriage as it appears in the Massachusetts Constitution," Tauro wrote.

Wasn't it the Cheshire Cat in Alice in Wonderland who said that words meant what he said they meant -- no more, no less?

[maryz]

ping

[EGPWS]

Should it get to the Supreme Court, there may not be anywhere to go.

Well, there are always options, however if it goes to the Supremes, the only mode of transportation to get there may be a "hand basket"! ; )

[Recovering_Democrat]

BUMP TO THE SCOTUS!

[Sandy]

No federal court is going to bother with this. It's a state matter.

[maryz]

A federal judge heard the case, and the First Circuit is taking the appeal. I think the federal issue would be the conflict between the "full faith and credit" clause and the Defense of Marriage Act.

[Sandy]

I said no federal court will bother with it, "bother with it" meaning "take it seriously".

[mrsmith]

I can't see any federal issue here yet.
When someone tries to get "full faith and credit" in another state for their gay 'marriage', there would be.

Logically of course it isn't the constitutionally guaranteed "republican form of government" when a state's constitution has no meaning, but court rulings are exempted from that clause- by the courts.

[markv840]

Remind me never to move to Massachusetts (already the land of John Kerry and Ted Kennedy)

[maryz]

I guess one of their major argumement was that the MA constitution (uniquely) reserves questions of marriage to the Legislature. The First Circuit wouldn't intervene now, but will hear arguments in June. The Supreme Court wouldn't take it now (though it will undoubtedly hear it eventually).

[maryz]

Howie Carr had a couple of segments on the radio yesterday on "Why are you embarrassed to live in Massachusetts?" I didn't hear the whole thing, but I didn't have to. Kennedy, Kerry, the SJC (esp. Margaret Marshall, appointed by Republicans - named to the Court by Weld, raised to Chief Justice by Cellucci), the Boston office of the FBI -- if he'd asked why you're proud to live in Massachusetts, it would have been a lot shorter segment!

Don't wait for me -- save yourself!

[Hilda]

Is it true that he used the tenth Amendment for this? If so I don’t think that’s a good use of the Tenth Amendment.