Gawker's 17 wry "reasons" SCotUS hasn't announced taking or not the equal marriage rights cases yet
*************QUOTE*************
http://gawker.com/5964952/why-the-supreme-court-hasnt-taken-either-gay-marriage-case-yet
[font size=5]Why The Supreme Court Hasn’t Taken Either Gay Marriage Case Yet[/font]
Mallory Ortberg
The Supreme Court met Friday to discuss the possibility of hearing arguments for two high-profile cases concerning gay marriage (one for California's Proposition 8 and the other for the federal Defense of Marriage Act), but "surprised" everyone when they made neither a decision nor an announcement by the end of the day.
Maybe they'll make an announcement Monday, maybe they'll wait until they meet again in January. Maybe they'll put their fingers in their ears and chant "I can't hear you, I can't hear you" until the seas turn red and the sun wheezes itself into blackness. They had been "widely expected to decide whether to take up a case that could ultimately determine whether there is a fundamental right to same-sex marriage," but you can't pin these nine free spirits down. They have their reasons for not making a decision yet, reasons like: (“reason” #s 1-11 here) ....
* (#12 of 17: ) Concerned about acting deliberately; as Northwestern law professor Andrew Koppelman puts it:
"What do they have to gain by hearing this case? Either they impose same sex marriage on the whole country, which would create a political firestorm, or they say there's no right to same-sex marriage, in which case they are going to be reversed in 20 years and be badly remembered. They'll be the villains in the historical narrative." ....
* (#15 of 17: ) Tired of listening to arguments; when is anyone going to listen to them for a change? They have problems too. And thoughts. Lots of thoughts. About a lot of stuff, if anyone would listen, which they don't ....
*************UNQUOTE*************
= new reply since forum marked as read
