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


1 posted on 03/26/2013 10:38:49 AM PDT by South40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: South40

They always try to duck ruling on the tough cases.


2 posted on 03/26/2013 10:41:32 AM PDT by white trash redneck (Just one of B. Hussein Obama's "typical white people")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: South40
Such an outcome would almost certainly allow gay marriages to resume in California but would have no impact elsewhere.

Actually, such a ruling would also vacate the 9th Circuit decision. If the SCOTUS doesn't have jurisdiction, then neither did the 9th Circuit.

5 posted on 03/26/2013 10:46:02 AM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: South40

If they take the case, all Obama has to do is look sternly at Roberts, and he’ll change sides.


6 posted on 03/26/2013 10:46:37 AM PDT by brownsfan (Behold, the power of government cheese.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: South40

so in other words they’re attempting to let the repeal of Prop 8 stand without getting their fingerprints on it. Cowards, the entire lot of them.


8 posted on 03/26/2013 10:48:24 AM PDT by SCHROLL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: South40

If SCOTUS doesn’t hear the case I suspect it means they believe the public needs more conditioning before they will peacefully accept a pro-Gay decision.


13 posted on 03/26/2013 10:52:24 AM PDT by Iron Munro (Welcome to Obama-Land - EVERYTHING NOT FORBIDDEN IS COMPULSORY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: South40

Then why did they take the case in the first place? They took the case, had attorneys for both sides (and countles amici) present brief, scheduled a hearing .. and NOW they suggest they may not make a decision on this case?

They could have just refused to take the case when it was initially brought to the Court.


14 posted on 03/26/2013 10:53:56 AM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: South40

You can hear/read this morning’s argument here:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_audio_detail.aspx?argument=12-144


18 posted on 03/26/2013 11:01:56 AM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: South40

Seems to me it will be tough for them to say the Prop 8 supporters don’t have standing, when the California Supreme Court said they do in a unanimous ruling. In the past, the US Supreme Court has deferred to the state to determine standing in a case like this - and the California Supreme Court gave a detailed discussion of that in their ruling.


19 posted on 03/26/2013 11:11:27 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (America is becoming California, and California is becoming Detroit. Detroit is already hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: South40

I would like to know how many gays really want to get married - considering they can already become hooked up in civil unions.. and that doesn’t please them.

This entire thing is about overriding States rights. They do not like that we can have a represenative government- because they all want to be sumissive little girls and have a big strong government ruler whisk them away into slavery where they can play with their wang doodles all day in SandM heaven.

I mean serioulsy they are such freaks.

I am seriously so sick of these people.


21 posted on 03/26/2013 11:14:30 AM PDT by Truth2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: South40

What weasels. The case IS properly before them because they took it.

Legalese be damned.

Does the federal government have the right to overrule the legal vote of the people or not?

The 9th circus says that they do. The people say no, you do not: we ammended our constitution to say what we want it to say.Butt out.

Thats the question before the court: strike down the ruling that ruled the ammendment unconstitutional.

After that you and go back to skeet shooting with each other.


22 posted on 03/26/2013 11:24:32 AM PDT by Adder (No, Mr. Franklin, we could NOT keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: South40

It’s simply NOT a civil or constitutional right. When civil rights are denied, it is generally a case of denying rights based on immutable characteristics, such as in the case of discrimination against blacks or women. In the case of “gay marriage”, that represents a behavioral choice. Society is not required to accept or sanction every behavioral choice or form of behavior.


25 posted on 03/26/2013 11:54:08 AM PDT by mtrott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: South40

They should simply invalidate the interference of all federal courts on the issue, as its a state matter. Prop 8 is part of the Constitution of the State of California, and neither 9th circuit nor the Supreme Court nor any other federal court or agency has any business ruling on it.


35 posted on 03/26/2013 12:41:46 PM PDT by AndyTheBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: South40

SCROTUS strikes again.

Oh, that’s right, they don’t have any, so they’ll duck ‘n run like they always do. Unless there’s money to be made by the blood-sucking government. Like killing babies and forcing crappy healthcare onto people who don’t need it.


36 posted on 03/26/2013 12:43:14 PM PDT by Up Yours Marxists
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: South40

A simple decision, really. Prop 8 was overturned by a federal judge who said that the majority of the voters in the state could not change their state constitution, with the ridiculous excuse that a non-existent federal law prohibited them from doing so.

And his decision was further diminished by his not recusing himself, though he had a profound conflict of interest.

As such, the clear opinion of the SCOTUS should be that if the people of California want to hold a referendum to change their constitution to permit homosexual marriage, they are free to do so. But until then, their opinion cannot be overruled by whimsical judicial decisions.


41 posted on 03/26/2013 1:32:25 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy (Best WoT news at rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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