Supreme Court Declines to Intervene in Gay Marriage Cases

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by rdowns, Oct 6, 2014.

  1. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #1
    I wonder what their reasoning is for punting on the bigger issue instead of refusing to hear appeal for 5 states.



    http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/sup...declines-intervene-gay-marriage-cases-n219276
     
  2. Symtex macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    #2
    Why the hatred towards gay marriages ? They have the right to be miserable too ! (married)

    Seriously, whoever is opposed to same-sex marriage really need to take a good look in the mirror. Its not going to be the end of the society. Theses people life together already. They just want the same tax benefits are heterosexual marriages. Let them have it.
     
  3. Southern Dad macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Georgia
    #3
    Absolutely, sell some additional marriage licenses and make divorce attorneys richer. I see no reason to let people marry who they want (no children or banyard animals).
     
  4. Symtex macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    #4
    Duh ! Conservative has been spewing this non-sense bs for way too long. No children or banyard animals are not next if we allow same-sex marriage.
     
  5. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #5
    If you've noticed, they have yet to argue a case for same-sex marriage. And I don't think they are going to.

    Now, before anyone brings up Perry v. Schwarzennegger (Prop. 8 ), the issue with the Prop 8 case was the legal standing of the case, not the merits. Since the defendants of the case brought it to SCOTUS to argue if the plaintiffs had legal standing to even challenge Walker's ruling (and SCOTUS called it right with them not having legal standing in the case), they never got to the merits of it.

    So there really isn't any obligation for them to take any case for it, as the Court of Appeals is getting it right. In fact, it would be the second case brought to the Court of Appeals that would have legal precedence; because of that, any ruling that goes contradictory to that ruling would then be brought to SCOTUS because there would be the conflict that SCOTUS would have to resolve. Because there is no conflict, SCOTUS is declining to hear them, more than likely based on 9th and 10th Constitutional Amendments coming into play.

    BTW: With SCOTUS declining to hear these cases, the majority of states in the United States of America now allows same-sex marriage.

    BL.
     
  6. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #7
    I can feel the American religious establishment shaking with anger all the way across the Atlantic from here.
     
  7. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #8
    Sorry.. I farted. :D

    BL.
     
  8. SLC Flyfishing Suspended

    SLC Flyfishing

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #9
    I think it's because there was no disagreement among the lower courts
     
  9. iBlazed macrumors 68000

    iBlazed

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2014
    Location:
    New Jersey, United States
    #10
    Wow. Pretty surprising move, especially considering that both sides of the debate were pushing for SCOTUS to settle the issue. I guess we're going to have to wait for another appeals court to uphold a same sex marriage ban. Which, at this point may not happen if all future judges who decide this issue take a hint from the Supreme Court for letting the current appeals court rulings stand. In any case, congrats to all the people who can now marry. 26 more states to go!

    ----------

    It was legal in 19 states already. This action by SCOTUS makes that 24 states. Unless I'm missing something....

    ----------

    I also want to say that this is significant, because now a direct supreme court action legalized gay marriage in 5 states, this is a first. SCOTUS is now directly responsible for allowing gay people to wed in 5 states. If they ever choose to take on a gay marriage case now, the chances they will strip all those couples they allowed to wed of their rights and void their marriages by upholding states gay marriage bans are slim to none. I think this was a message that they agree with the appeals courts, and if they are forced to take a case in the future they will surely strike down state ssm bans as unconstitutional.
     
  10. macquariumguy macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Location:
    Sarasota FL
    #11
    Exactly right.
     
  11. colourfastt macrumors 6502a

    colourfastt

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    #12
    What you're missing is that it also includes all the states included in the various appeals circuits. So the Virginia case also includes North Carolina, South Carolina, and West Virginia. When you add all the different circuits it is more than 24 states total.
     
  12. iBlazed macrumors 68000

    iBlazed

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2014
    Location:
    New Jersey, United States
    #13
    Yep I just looked into it. Same sex marriage will now be legal in 30 states from what I understand.
     
  13. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #14
    27 more to go :p
     
  14. iBlazed macrumors 68000

    iBlazed

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2014
    Location:
    New Jersey, United States
    #15
    And also the 9th circuit in San Fran will be ruling on gay marriage soon, and they cover 9 states, which will bring the number up to 39 states most likely before the end of 2014. So after that only 18 more to go!:D
     
  15. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #16
    its taking a bit long to get there.
     
  16. iBlazed macrumors 68000

    iBlazed

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2014
    Location:
    New Jersey, United States
    #17
    I'm not so sure of that, all this progress has occurred relatively quickly in comparison to other civil rights issues in the past. This was completely inconceivable just 10 years ago. However, the stage for the next battle has been set. It will be a battle of whether business owners and landlords have a constitutional right to discriminate against gay couples or employees.
     
  17. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #18
    Roberts and Co, are hoping they don't have to make this decision. If all the other courts rule for it, then their hands are clean. As it stands the court is 5-4 pro gay. The pope might just have the Catholic SC heads on a platter if Roberts does anything to encourage Teh ghey.
     
  18. Southern Dad macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Georgia
    #19
    Are you sure that the SCOTUS is 5-4 pro-gay? Six justices are Roman Catholic and three are Jewish. Five appointed by Republican presidents and four by Democrats.

    I think that this is one of those things that the SCOTUS wants to be decided by the states. This is of course, just my opinion.
     
  19. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #20
    Not just your opinion here. Every news analyst covering SCOTUS is saying the same. They are not going to touch any case involving same-sex marriage, unless something like legal standing for a given state comes up, like it did with Perry.

    BL.
     
  20. iBlazed macrumors 68000

    iBlazed

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2014
    Location:
    New Jersey, United States
    #21
    If they weren't, DOMA would still be in place. If SCOTUS were forced to take up SSM because of a disagreement in appeals courts, it seems pretty obvious which they they would swing at this point. Not to mention, if they wanted to, they could have taken up one of these cases and ruled in favor of the states, but they let the low court rulings against the states stand. When you let a ruling stand, it implies that you condone it.
     
  21. Southern Dad macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Georgia
    #22
    DOMA is a federal law. These are state laws. Big difference.
     
  22. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #23
    Agreed. Someone would have to sue the United States for federal laws, and that would go straight to SCOTUS, with the AG being the defendant. We know how that story played out.

    BL.
     
  23. rdowns thread starter macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #24
    Haters gonna hate.



    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/10/...tm_campaign=Feed:+TheRawStory+(The+Raw+Story)
     
  24. iBlazed macrumors 68000

    iBlazed

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2014
    Location:
    New Jersey, United States
    #25
    That is true. But if they found that the federal government is violating the constitutional rights of gay couples by not recognizing their married status, why would they allow a state to get away with violating a constitutional right? My opinion is that they would not. But I guess it remains to be seen, although I think today was a huge hint at where they stand.

    ----------

    I guess its hard to accept being in the minority. A federal constitutional ban on gay marriage is mathematically impossible at this point. They could have probably successfully passed one a decade ago, but that ship has long sailed...
     

Share This Page