Boehner Expects House G.O.P. to Accept Gay Marriage Ruling

[DonViejo]

Source: New York Times

Speaker John A. Boehner said on Thursday that he expected House Republicans to accept the decision on same-sex marriage that the Supreme Court is scheduled to issue later this year.

“I don’t expect that we’re going to weigh in on this,” Mr. Boehner said. “The court will make its decision, and that’s why they’re there, to be the highest court in the land.”

The statement comes as a bit of a surprise, given the House Republicans’ expensive defense of the Defense of Marriage Act in 2013.

After the Obama administration said it would no longer defend the act, House Republicans, through the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, took up the legal defense, quickly burning through cash.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/02/05/boehner-says-he-expects-party-to-accept-gay-marriage-ruling/?_r=0

---

[RKP5637]

1. Excellent!!! I'm pleasantly surprised. n/t

[Fearless]

2. What? Are they tired of spending taxpayer money on useless debates over

Publicly supported items?


Or are they trying to sure up the Log Cabin Republican vote as they worry more and more about the future of their party?

[Iliyah]

3. Is the 5 justices leaking the decisions?

GOP already know about O Care as well?

AND the GOPs for many many many years will not accept it.

[RationalMan]

6. I don't believe the Justices have communicated anything at this point.......

I think Boehner was, for a change, being honest and forthright in saying that should the Supreme Court issue a decision in favor of marriage equality that renders all state laws and state constitutional amendments that prohibit same gender marriage unconstitutional, he does not see the House taking any action on the issue.

I think the Court will have a hard time explaining the patchwork of legal issues created by the lack of uniformity on marriage equality. They now have Circuits with different decisions and realize that the status who doesn't work. In my state of Georgia, even if you are legally married in another state not only is the marriage not recognized but you cannot use the state courts to obtain a divorce or child custody. One in the marriage must move to a different state that recognizes marriage equality and establish the required residency to be able to obtain a divorce and/or child custody ruling. I am not even sure if a Georgia court would be able to enforce the results of the divorce and/or the child custody decisions. This shouldn't be the case under the full faith and credit provision of the U.S. Constitution but I cannot be sure.

He will likely face voices in the Teapotty wing of his caucus calling for a constitutional amendment banning marriage equality. I think, though, he recognizes that public opinion on the matter has evolved significantly even among self-identified Republicans and the political risk or benefit of challenging marriage equality a wash or even a loss.

As for how the Court will rule with respect to subsidies when someone purchases health insurance from the federal exchange in a state where the state refused to establish an exchange is an open question. Strict constructionists will argue the law is clear, subsidies are only available for individuals who sign up for insurance on a state-run exchange. Others who recognize, even from the Court's own precedence, one must look beyond the letter of the law to the intent, argue the expectation was that states would establish their own exchanges. The impact on individuals in those "red" states will be a factor in their decision.

[onehandle]

4. So the GOP will fold when 'traditional marriage' is killed by SCOTUS?

Are you listening teafuckers?

Time to go full on third party. Leave the librul GOP.

[NYC Liberal]

5. Do they have any other option? I suppose they could try a constitutional amendment, but that

was a pipe dream even 10+ years ago when most of the bans were being passed originally. It's not even a remote possibility now.

[Cryptoad]

7. Does this mean,,,,

that the GOP will now consider the Gay Folk to be "real " Americans?

[George II]

8. Well, that's quite a "concession". If the Supreme Court rules to accept gay marriage......

....don't the republicans HAVE to accept it?

[DonViejo]

15. Yes, they do have to accept it but...

that doesn't mean they won't go kicking and screaming all the way to acceptance. I wouldn't be surprised if Huckabee, the wing nuts and the Flying Monkey Brigade of the GOP didn't call for a massive march on Washington, similar to the one in Paris when France legalized gay marriage. I fear some members of the Flying Monkey Brigade will advocate, if not outright perform, acts of violence against Judges, elected officials and the LGBT community.

[underpants]

9. Boehner has no control or idea on the TeaBaggers or how the RW media will react

We'll see

[C Moon]

12. That was my first thought.

[enki23]

10. Making a virtue of necessity, I guess.

Thing is, we well know that they will eschew the virtue anyway. Necessary or not.

[LibDemAlways]

11. Boner can say whatever he wants. The baggers on

the far right will have plenty to say, too. There's no way they are ever going to accept marrige equality. They have no chance in hell of it succeeding, but a Constitutional Amendment will be their next goal.

[ChosenUnWisely]

13. Yeah they will accept it just like they are accepting the court rulings in FL, GA, AL, MS, etc...

A number of states, mainly in the southern proton of the USA, barely accepted via Federal force, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and have been passing or attempting to pass legislation denying rights to African-Americans ever since, they even go out of their way to include Latinos and the LBGT community today.

When the 5 hacks on the SCOTUS overturn preclearance, what did EVERY SINGLE one of the former Confederate States do, they immediately went back, with in hours of the ruling to their pre 64 Civil Rights Act ways.


This has been going on for over 51 years now and more of them are being elected to statehouse and Congress.

This will not stop anytime soon.

[blkmusclmachine]

14. It's 7-2 against marriage equality.

[DonViejo]

17. Who are the seven justices you believe will vote against it? eom

[Orsino]

16. Supremes are relieving the GOP of this hot potato.

Boehner wouldn't be shy about predicting or demanding a different decision that he wanted.

So today it's "highest court in the land" rather than unelected, activist judges.