General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSupreme Court, in surprise move, declines to hear gay marriage cases
The Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up the hotly contested issue of gay marriage, a surprise move that will allow gay men and women to marry in five states where same-sex weddings were previously banned.
By rejecting appeals in cases involving Virginia, Oklahoma, Utah, Wisconsin and Indiana, the court left intact lower-court rulings that struck down bans in those states.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/nationworld/chi-supreme-court-gay-marriage-20141006-story.html
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)My bet would be the 5th District if any would uphold the gay marriage bans. If that happens, the SCOTUS has to take it.
former9thward
(32,077 posts)They may want to let it be handled on a state by state basis.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)If they wanted it handled on a state by state basis, they would have taken one or all of the appeals.
This demonstrates clearly that at least five justices believe it is unconstitutional to limit marriage equality, but that the court simply does not want to take it up. If the court can wait it out and all of the Districts agree, it becomes a de facto SCOTUS ruling as the precedent would stand in each of the districts. As it is now, marriage equality is the law of the land in 30 states.
riqster
(13,986 posts)Trying to hide it, methinks.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)riqster
(13,986 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)would want to try and rebut Posner's opinion. Better not to even try.
Baitball Blogger
(46,757 posts)She said she wanted to sit on her hands and wait to see what the Supremes decided.
shenmue
(38,506 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)to the SCOTUS. Must have been an expedited or emergency appeal. Which means Posner's masterpiece of an opinion stands. The logic behind this is interesting. It may be that Roberts, like all CJs, is concerned with his legacy and wants to be on the right side of history; no one wants to be the next Taney, the CJ who wrote the Dred Scott opinion. Not taking the cases lets the pro-marriage equality decisions stand w/o the SCOTUS having to face the issue.
There is some third-dimensional chess behind this decision, methinks.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Despite losing, it'll help make sure their base shows up Nov 4th.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)el zilcho that WI can do in the face of the Seventh Circuit opinion. They may as well try and outlaw ghosts. Posner's opinion is The Last Word now that the SCOTUS has declined to review it. WI is gonna get marriage equality whether the Pukes like it or not.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... to hear it. Now they can still use it in future elections.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)There are legit reasons for not reviewing a decision. And agreeing with the lower court's reasoning is a big one.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)I guess I am cynical.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)There's no conflict among the Courts of Appeal, which is a very significant thumb on the scales when the SCOTUS decides to take a case. It also leaves those CofA decisions as the leading opinions on the subject, and that is a good thing.
calimary
(81,466 posts)After all, the EPIC disaster that is Citizens United hangs around HIS neck. And frankly, THIS won't do anything to remove it.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)This essentially ends any chance of any anti-marriage laws or state amendments surviving. It's all but over now, and that's the best news I've heard for some time.
A big Hurrah! is in order.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Posner served it up on a tee for the SCOTUS in an "I dare you to overrule this" ruling and they apparently do not want to touch that opinion with a ten-foot law clerk and I can't blame them. It's too airtight an opinion to mess with. My guess is that only Uncle Ruckus, Soapy Sam and Fat Tony voted to grant certiorari and four votes are needed.
dsc
(52,166 posts)First, any state within those circuits (Richmond. Chicago, and Minneapolis) will have marriage equality after a mere formality. that will add 11 states immediately. Second, any appellate court will likely take this into account and not rule against. Third, marriage equality will spread. The downside is that without a SCOTUS opinion it would be theoretically possible for a SCOTUS to rule that the marriages are invalid but it would be rather unlikely.