Is anyone surprised about how Roberts voted?
Posted on 06/26/2013 7:41:40 AM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
Gawd...Roberts has gone full-blown lib.
Horrible. Not a surprise though.
The incredible shrinking American culture continues.
Never would I defend Roberts after what he did on Obamacare, however, same Roberts joined and wrote the 5-4 decision on the Voting Rights Act, which is the correct position. He did not join the 4 full-blown libs. Just stating a fact...
I remember when people used to think Roberts was a conservative. Now if you just lie to him, he’ll vote your way.
From what I can gather this was decided on who did and did not have standing to bring case.
Also in this decision the 5-4 split was NOT idealogical.
You can’t vote FOR something and then elect crooked politicians who are against you on that same issue. It’s just dumb. Elections do have consequences. The California politicians pissed all over the California voters who elected them.
Could Harriet Miers have possibly been any worse??
So, who DID have standing to bring the case?
In a nutshell - Jerry Brown and a single judge have more power than the population of California. Citizens have "no legal standing" to appeal the judges ruling. That's what this decision means. I think this is far reaching and not good.
You guys finally ready to get fedgov out of the marriage sanctioning and subsidizing business yet? Or are you hoping a few more elections and you’ll be able to get big government to get rid of the strings attached to all those favors you let it do for you?
A technical ruling on standing as a result of the Governator and CA AG refusing to do their jobs and follow the results of a proposition election. Given the recent choice by the LDS on the Boy Scouts gay youth rule, it’s unlikely the LDS will be a factor in the same way they were in the first Prop.8 battles.
Perhaps we have a hint of what the NSA has learned about Roberts and how he is controlled.
Twice today.
TWICE TODAY.
Legally passed laws BY THE PEOPLE
were over turned.
This ruling is on a technical ground, I believe. The state of CA refused to defend this prop even though it passed. So this organization that opposes same-sex marriage defended the prop. The ruling is that this was not valid because this group had no standing to substitute for the state’s lack of defense.
The resulting demise of the prop is terrible, agreed.
But this was a legalism, not a moralism, or so it claims.
What’s your brilliant plan with spousal visas? I want to hear it.
The citizens of this country do not have a say any longer.
Laws passed by us are not relevant.
We are ruled.
That is all.
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.