General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums** SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS MARRIAGE RIGHTS FOR ALL ** 5-4 vote!
Fourteenth Amendment requires a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when a marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out of state.
Dissents by all four "no" votes
Glassunion
(10,201 posts)First Rec!!
For Freddie
(79 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Shamash
(597 posts)csziggy
(34,137 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Sunlei
(22,651 posts)malthaussen
(17,216 posts)That would certainly make the corporations cry.
-- Mal
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)underpants
(182,880 posts)I am not sure if that is what you were referencing but when I saw the thread about it I had to get back to your post.
DU may have to go to Defcon 4 today
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)I meant our 13th Amendment, where slavery is still 'legal' for prisoners. Harmed our society for over 100 years now and increasing every year.
America has never really set aside slavery.
3catwoman3
(24,046 posts)...outlier on that one?
underpants
(182,880 posts)There is very little reporting on it
underpants
(182,880 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)harrose
(380 posts)... that SCOTUS cannot overrule something in the Constitution. What you're looking for would require a Constitutional Amendment.
G_j
(40,371 posts)great news!!!
Shrike47
(6,913 posts)AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)tymorial
(3,433 posts)The tears that we in the LGBTQ community and our allies are shedding are so very much sweeter.
pink-o
(4,056 posts)About 25 years ago, I had 2 friends who were a long-time couple, Rob and Todd. Todd got ill with AIDS and when he knew he was dying they went to a lawyer and drew up what they thought was an airtight will so that Rob would inherit everything that they were sharing anyway. Well, lo and behold, Todd's Fundie idiot family, who had disowned him years previous, found a loophole in the will, and got it nullified. They came and took everything that had any sentimental value as well as the new car and electronics. They didn't care about Todd, they only wanted to be sure the love of his life didn't get anything--cuz he was an immoral sinner, after all. I remember the memorial we all had where we pulled together and spoke about how things were just material, and we had the best of Todd because we loved him.
But it's so poignantly sweet to know this could never happen again! I raise a glass to equality and my beautiful friends who in their struggles and their deaths are the stones who paved the way.
tymorial
(3,433 posts)History has shown us that the most fervent believers are often horrible people on the inside that hide their bile and hatred with religious camouflage. Hell, it doesn't even have to be religion. How often have we seen people who profess tolerance and love while at the same time exhibit none of those traits in real life. Many blame religion but that is just as I said camouflage. Some people are just made broken. I'm sorry for your loss.
You're right though, it is definitely poignant that today Todd's wishes would be fulfilled and Rob would not have to suffer at the hands of greedy nasty bigots.
SummerSnow
(12,608 posts)underpants
(182,880 posts)What a week!!!
Horse with no Name
(33,956 posts)LOL
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Impeach Roberts now, and let Obama name a replacement Chief Justice.
calimary
(81,478 posts)And THAT is MY "sincerely-held belief"!
mimi85
(1,805 posts)ebay and amazon had really removed all the confederate stuff like they said they would. no sign of it yet. figures.
Fritz Walter
(4,292 posts)Denn sie kommt von Herzen.
Translation: "Schadenfreude is the most beautiful kind of joy, because it comes from the heart."
Don't get me wrong! I'm happy for all the right reasons, but every once in a while it's fun to see karma bite hateful people in the ass.
niyad
(113,569 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Get thee to the greatest page.
Please crosspost in LGBT
And thank God!
a kennedy
(29,707 posts)could only watch for about 10 minutes yesterday on the health exchanges, but today, I'll try to watch a little longer.
AwakeAtLast
(14,134 posts)In a very historic week!
brooklynite
(94,729 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)and if they don't relent not onlyh will they end up marrying gay persons, but those persons will be rich too on the states dime.
Jeff Murdoch
(168 posts)project_bluebook
(411 posts)Jim Crow type laws applied to gay couples, just like they use to keep people from voting.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)way too close but so glad it's done.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)until they die of old age.
jmowreader
(50,562 posts)This has been such a lousy week to be a Republican. Gay marriage bans are dead nationwide. The ACA has been upheld. And the Southern Swastika is falling all over our great land.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)oh well, we'll take it!
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)DCBob
(24,689 posts)The Supremes are coming through for us!
Coventina
(27,172 posts)So happy.
What a great day for ALL Americans!!
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Spazito
(50,469 posts)Equal marriage, ACA and the Fair Housing Act!
Watching the celebration on television brings happy tears!
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)I'm happy and disappointed at the same time.
Clearly, there are those on the bench that would like to ensure the entire nation lives by their moral imperatives and religious doctrines.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Exilednight
(9,359 posts)Skidmore
(37,364 posts)It should never have been a question to come before the courts. We are all equal.
longship
(40,416 posts)The opinion seems to go out of its way not to state a standard of scrutiny. Instead, it says, "It is now clear that the challenged laws burden the liberty of same-sex couples, and it must be further acknowledged that they abridge central precepts of equality . . . Especially against a long history of disapproval of their relationships, this denial to same-sex couples of the right to marry works a grave and continuing harm. The imposition of this disability on gays and lesbians serves to disrespect and subordinate them. And the Equal Protection Clause, like the Due Process Clause, prohibits this unjustified infringement of the fundamental right to marry." That's page 22.
This means a very broad interpretation.
The assenters did not want there to be any question.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)From the majority opinion, addressing the role of history in the constitutional analysis: "The nature of injustice is that we may not always see it in our own times. The generations that wrote and ratified the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment did not presume to know the extent of freedom in all of its dimensions, and so they entrusted to future generations a character protecting the right of all persons to enjoy liberty as we learn its meaning."
by Kevin Russell 9:14 AM
A direct slap in the face to the "constructionism" approach of Scalia to the Constitution, and bodes well for future decisions.....I think Kennedy has had enough of being trolled.
underpants
(182,880 posts)Just like Loving v. Virginia
We have 4 people officially on the public record as no brainers.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)We've long known that to be true!
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)Politicub
(12,165 posts)LynneSin
(95,337 posts)I mean we know how those idiots Scalia, Thomas and Alito voted
This is great news today.
And today wasn't about giving special rights to same sex couples.
It was about creating equality for all people.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)LynneSin
(95,337 posts)At least he let people keep their health insurance.
But today reminds me why I will fight hard for whomever the democratic nominee is. I do not want any more bigots on the Supreme Court. I can only imagine who those Clowns in the GOP Clown car would nominate if any of them were to get into the White House.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)I think it's the religion. It just make logic and sense fly out the window. And since the ONLY objections are religion based....
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)Yeah, they would *never* let their religious beliefs come before what the Constitution clearly states.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)calimary
(81,478 posts)Nobody's holding a gun to anyone else's head and forcing them to marry someone of the same sex.
Nobody's holding a gun to anyone else's head and forcing them to discard their opposite-sex marriage and replace it with a same-sex one.
Although, I sometimes wonder if - adding a gun into the picture might make them change their minds?
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Yeah...
just being forced to marry bicycles and hamsters.
TM99
(8,352 posts)This is great news.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)The majority bases its conclusion that same-sex marriage is a fundamental right on "four principles and traditions": (1) right to person choice in marriage is "inherent in the concept of individual autonomy"; (2) "two-person union unlike any other in its importance to the committed individuals"; (3) marriage safeguards children and families; (4) marriage is a keystone to our social order. -
http://live.scotusblog.com/Event/Live_blog_of_opinions__June_26_2015#sthash.4jE59c0V.dpuf
And Scalia is going Full Fox Troll.
Again.
malthaussen
(17,216 posts)... or see how it can be a point of law, but that's a different fight. 3 and 4 are iffy as well, as legal considerations. (They're all qualitative judgements, not concrete)
With the decision, I have no argument at all. Hope Justice Scalia and his homies have a nice day.
-- Mal
MineralMan
(146,331 posts)the nation. Bravo SCOTUS!
underpants
(182,880 posts)m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)alarimer
(16,245 posts)Guess I'm gonna need a new one.
But the taste of bigots tears is so very sweet.
My better half has a coworker that keeps saying that to his partner and her every time she wants to help plan their wedding. I wonder what his next excuse will be too. Thanks for making me chuckle I woke up in a lot of pain this morning and needed one.
rocktivity
(44,577 posts)If race can't be considered, how can sexual orientation?
rocktivity
prayin4rain
(2,065 posts)luvspeas
(1,883 posts)So so happy for my friends and everyone in our country right now. The stories I have heard over the years...partners that can't say goodbye to dying loved ones...children tortured by removal from loving homes...couples who have gone to great lengths to assure the financial security of a partner in case of death who are denied access...and on and on...this is so much more than love. It's about justice.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Gamecock Lefty
(700 posts)Maybe, just maybe, the country is moving left? FINALLY!!!
Now if we can just get rid of Thomas and Scalia!
Gloria
(17,663 posts)ACA upheld, marriage rights...
Now...we have to clean up VOTING RIGHTS and get back to WOMEN!!!
SunSeeker
(51,703 posts)It can be used to push back against humiliating abortion restrictions, as well as to invalidate voting restrictions that suppress the votes of the poor and minorities.
Gloria
(17,663 posts)so far. I'm no lawyer, I keep hearing " undue burden", but not sure how it all ties tgether since Roe involved "privacy."
SunSeeker
(51,703 posts)Roe's "undue burden" on 4th Am privacy is such a subjective standard. "Equal" is pretty clear.
Abortion is a simple medical procedure. It should be treated EQUALLY with other similar medical procedures. It should be left up to the woman and her doctor. If you don't have to watch a shaming video and have a medically unnecessary probe shoved up you to get a vasectomy, you should not have to do it for an abortion either. If vasectomies can be done in doctor's suites, so can abortions. If clinics performing vasectomies aren't required to have 12' wide hallways and surgeons with hospital admitting privileges, neither do abortion clinics.
Gloria
(17,663 posts)And frustrated if it hasn't been used effectively so far...
Thanks for the details...
SunSeeker
(51,703 posts)Skinner
(63,645 posts)Fantastic!!!!!!!!!
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)K&R!!
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
niyad
(113,569 posts)BeeBee
(1,074 posts)Roy Rolling
(6,933 posts)This will now certainly turn people gay. Or, at least, gay-ish.
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)LW1977
(1,236 posts)Shove it, Santorum!
Phentex
(16,334 posts)No more stupid excuses from the haters!!!
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]
underpants
(182,880 posts)Flags coming down
Obamacare lives
Marriage equality
Three strikes and sentencing are out
Fair Housing Act ruling
WOW!
bucolic_frolic
(43,289 posts)No, Antonin, you're thinking of Bush v. Gore, remember?
You stopped the vote counting and decided who would rule us, which
is what your sorry derriere is whining about today.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]
project_bluebook
(411 posts)I still don't like the fact that 9 kings and queens hold so much power over this country.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)Ignore them. (You know, after we're done laughing at them.) Their opinions don't matter anymore. It's over, they lost. Utterly.
nolabear
(41,991 posts)I'm so happy I could bust.
ismnotwasm
(42,014 posts)What a great day!
Iwillnevergiveup
(9,298 posts)No slimey, sneaky news dumps THIS Friday. I truly have tears in my eyes as I celebrate this ruling. No thanks to Roberts---oh, screw him---we didn;t need him after all.
stage left
(2,966 posts)At last!
Crowman1979
(3,844 posts)BOO-YAH!
UtahLib
(3,179 posts)Lint Head
(15,064 posts)amuse bouche
(3,657 posts)B Calm
(28,762 posts)amuse bouche
(3,657 posts)I am so sick of them trying to drag this country backwards
If they would keep their traps shut and worship behind closed doors, I could tolerate them
Until then......I'll just
Ms. Toad
(34,091 posts)to have the Supreme Court marry us.
Should have thought of that before we worked 8 years with our faith community to marry us. Way simpler
. . . now I'll have to see if I'm mentioned in the opinion - or at least the amicus brief I'm cited in.
orleans
(34,073 posts)brer cat
(24,606 posts)all over America! It is a great day!!!!!!!!
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Roberts would be in the majority.
But this is a GREAT DAY nonetheless!!
A great day for the country and especially for all our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters!
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)....religious bigots heads exploding
SpankMe
(2,966 posts)This has been an unbelievably good week for our side of these issues - and with a conservative court.
We're winning the war. Let's not relent one bit.
Kablooie
(18,641 posts)AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Boo-ya!
Raster
(20,998 posts)Scalia and Thomas will have to wait a bit longer.
Initech
(100,103 posts)Gothmog
(145,562 posts)kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)dmr
(28,349 posts)It's a good day in America. A good day, indeed.
niyad
(113,569 posts)sellitman
(11,607 posts)Nah.... Forget that.
Lol
William769
(55,147 posts)SpankMe
(2,966 posts)This kind of snark ('Ask the nearest hippie.' - really!) is beneath the dignity of the Supreme Court.
The man is headed into senility, and I don't mean that as a metaphor or mean-spirited characterization. I really sense that his mental capacity is waning due to age-related deterioration of the brain. Not Alzheimer's, since his memory still seems good. But I truly believe we're seeing the first steps toward dementia.
If it becomes more obvious within the next few years, I wonder what's involved in removing him from the court? Can his fellow justices relieve him of duty based on diminished capacity? Or, is an impeachment and removal by Congress a hard requirement?
niyad
(113,569 posts)salads.
SunSeeker
(51,703 posts)"Pokery jiggery" even.
niyad
(113,569 posts)have not heard it used in years, and suddenly it seems to be in vogue again. any idea why?
SunSeeker
(51,703 posts)That is how he described the majority opinion's reasoning re the ACA.
niyad
(113,569 posts)SunSeeker
(51,703 posts)What does it actually mean?
niyad
(113,569 posts)Gray vs. grey? What's the difference?
jiggery-pokery
[jig-uh-ree-poh-kuh-ree]
IPA Syllables
Word Origin
noun, Chiefly British
1.
trickery, hocus-pocus; fraud; humbug.
2.
sly, underhanded action.
3.
manipulation:
After a little jiggery-pokery, the engine started.
Origin of jiggery-pokery Expand
1890-18951890-95; alteration of joukery-pawkery. See jouk, pawky, -ery
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2015.
Cite This Source
British Dictionary definitions for jiggery-pokery Expand
jiggery-pokery
/ˈdʒɪɡərɪˈpəʊkərɪ/
noun
1.
(informal, mainly Brit) dishonest or deceitful behaviour or business; trickery
Word Origin
C19: from Scottish dialect joukery-pawkery
Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 2012 Digital Edition
© William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins
Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2012
Cite This Source
Slang definitions & phrases for jiggery-pokery Expand
jiggery-pokery
noun
Deception; trickery; skullduggery: or what some term jiggery-pokery/ could have prevented most of the jiggery-pokery
[1893+; probably fr Scottish joukery-paukery fr jouk, ''trick'']
The Dictionary of American Slang, Fourth Edition by Barbara Ann Kipfer, PhD. and Robert L. Chapman, Ph.D.
Copyright (C) 2007 by HarperCollins Publishers.
Cite This Source
alarimer
(16,245 posts)I would have won that bet too.
Thanks, Obama.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)but that same SCOTUS gutted and trampled into the dirt my Civil Rights protections, so my enthusiasm is muted.
sheshe2
(83,903 posts)niyad
(113,569 posts)for divorce?
3catwoman3
(24,046 posts)...masterful response to Willard in the debate - "Please proceed, preacher man."
Duval
(4,280 posts)I didn't think this wold happen in my lifetime. After the disastrous "Citizens' United", we have seen the Supreme Court give thousands the right to health care, although this one can be improved, and now the right to marry for all LGBT.
I've seen thousands of happy faces on TV. Obama's remarks were, well, remarkable.
fishwax
(29,149 posts)whatthehey
(3,660 posts)gopiscrap
(23,765 posts)Frankfurt, Germany we just found out while having dinner at the Hauptbahnhof
Takket
(21,625 posts)Same-sex marriage is now in the constitution and it can't ever be taken back out!!!!
tymorial
(3,433 posts)I don't care about the dissents. They don't matter to me. I will not focus on the negative of those opinions. Today is a brilliant day for my fellow LGBTQs. This smile will not go away for a while. Where are the tissues.
47of74
(18,470 posts)Your reich wing friends and family may need these;
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Equality!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)the next battleground will be the resteraunteurs and the cake bakers etc who will claim religious freedom so as not to service a gay wedding. but then it will move to housing etc. eventually someone will come forward and say their religion forbids them to interact with someone of a different race, or women, or whatever. within a year, two tops, the supremes will have to affirm civil rights and say that if you have a public business you have to serve all the public. or else get into a different line of work.
today, party! tomorrow, watch the flank.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)Funny that.
tymorial
(3,433 posts)I said that I didn't care about the dissents. I am reading a live blog on yahoo which is posting the various comments from politicians along with excerpts from the justices' opinions. I haven't had the chance to read them all but this is from that bloated windbag Scalia...
"Not a single evangelical Christian (a group that comprises about one quarter of Americans), or even a Protestant ofa ny denomination. The strikingly unrepresentative character of the body voting on today's social upheaval would be irrelevant if they were functioning as judges, answering the legal question whether the American people had ever ratified a constitutional provision that was understood to proscribe the traditional definition of marriage. But of course the Justices in today's majority are not voting on that basis; they say they are not . And to allow the policy question of same sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principal even more fundamental than no taxation without representation; no social transformation without representation.
His entire notion that the justices must represent religious demographic is preposterous. Scalia believes that the constitution must be read as written with full understanding of the original intent of the founders . He believes therefore that the language must not reflect our current understanding as they relate to our modern culture but that of the culture during the period when the amendment was ratified. For someone so narrow in his views regarding the constitution, I wonder how he reconciles the fact that judicial review is inferred and not specifically stated. That issue aside, the individual religious beliefs of a justice is completely irrelevant given that the first amendment prohibits enacting legislation with religion as justification. The justices acting in concert to perform a judicial review are bound by the same 1st amendment mandate. They are to refrain from religious consideration when passing judgement.
Scalia's ramblings are schizophrenic and incoherent. I just do not understand what Ginsburg sees in him that we don't.
TeeYiYi
(8,028 posts)It's a great day to be gay in America...
TYY
bluesbassman
(19,379 posts):thumbs up:
Hekate
(90,797 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)I kid. [URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]
DrBulldog
(841 posts). . . that Thomas and Scalia are LUNATICS. How in hell did they ever graduate from law school?
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)After I found out about this today?
Jesus, this makes me so damned happy! It's about time.
So I first saw this on reddit, and they have a ton of threads on it already and I just can't stop crying. I guess I really didn't think this was going to pass.
This is a day to be marked on my calendar for celebrations.
Cha
(297,665 posts)mahalo brooklynite~
craigmatic
(4,510 posts)Now we can all equally have half our stuff taken in divorce.
BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)lostnfound
(16,190 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)Simeon Salus
(1,144 posts)The village will be a crazy happy place tonight.
sheshe2
(83,903 posts)Calista241
(5,586 posts)Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)IronLionZion
(45,530 posts)Probably Tony Scalia's marriage might be over! Maybe Clarence Thomas's too!
Thanks Obama and Dems and the 5 justices