DOMA | Gay Marriage | News | Proposition 8

SCOTUS Postpones Conference of Prop 8, DOMA Cases

We'll have to wait ten days longer to hear wihether or not the Supreme Court will take up any cases related to DOMA or Proposition 8, AFER reports:

SupremesAFER just received word from the U.S. Supreme Court that it will discuss whether to hear AFER’s federal constitutional challenge to California’s Proposition 8 at its private Conference on Friday, November 30.

The Court will also consider on that date whether it will hear one or more challenges to the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Both the Prop. 8 case and the DOMA cases had previously been distributed for discussion at the Justices’ November 20 Conference.

The updated timeline suggests that we will likely find out if our case will be heard by the nation’s highest court, or if marriages can resume in California, by Monday, December 3. However, there is no deadline by which the Court must act, and the Justices could hold the case for consideration at a future Conference.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. kicking the can, but they are almost out of road.

    Posted by: bandanajack | Nov 13, 2012 2:49:35 PM


  2. I'm so sick of this! Why should loving, committed gay couples have to put their lives on hold for these ass-hats to make up their minds! UGH!

    Posted by: Steve | Nov 13, 2012 2:59:22 PM


  3. Both Prop 8 and DOMA are so clear cut that there isn't any ambiguity or that the defendant is ready to present any new arguments. Prop 8 is solely a state issue and there's no federal laws being challenged. With 9 states having legalized same-sex marriage, the federal government can no longer justify treating opposite-sex and same-sex couples differently under the 14th Amendment. Section 3 of DOMA clearly violates that amendment. Judges in 8 federal courts cannot be wrong.

    However, it only takes 3 Justices to agree whether to hear a case and knowing Thomas, Scalia and Alito - we could very well see that both issues are taken up and drag on as long as possible even though they know the courts will eventually rule both Prop 8 and DOMA unconstitutional.

    Seeing this really makes you appreciate even more the fact that President Obama won the re-election. He needs to start vetting qualified people to be nominated to the SCOTUS that will stay there for at least the next 25 - 30 years.

    Posted by: gayalltheway | Nov 13, 2012 3:21:47 PM


  4. If Prop 8 were solely as state issue, the Federal Courts would not have touched it. The Federal District Court said that marriage equality was a 14th Amendment right; the 9th Circuit said that states cannot abridge rights once granted. If SCOTUS denies cert., the 9th Circuit decision stands. If they want to go back to the broader District Court opinion, or take the position that a states' power to limit marriage is constrained only by the procedural due process of its Constitution, then they'll have to hear the case. The decision to review requires four, not three, justices to carry.

    Posted by: Rich | Nov 13, 2012 4:13:28 PM


  5. GAYALLTHEWAY wrote: "Seeing this really makes you appreciate even more the fact that President Obama won the re-election. He needs to start vetting qualified people to be nominated to the SCOTUS that will stay there for at least the next 25 - 30 years."

    My suggestion: Kenji Yoshino! Asian-American out gay man. The next big step in bringing true diversity to the court.

    Posted by: RWG | Nov 13, 2012 4:31:43 PM


  6. It's time they got their heads out of their asses and did the right thing !

    There also needs to be new laws to FORCE the Supreme Court to take cases. It's not acceptable that they can pick and choose the cases they take. What happens to the cases that have been waiting for 10 years ? Someone may have a legitimate concern/argument but the useless Supreme Court can just ignore them.

    It's time to change the system completely. EVERY citizen should have a right to have their case heard by the Supreme Court. Why is one person's case more important than another ? We all pay taxes (except the mega rich) so we should all have the same access to the justice system.

    Our whole political and judicial systems are broken and embarrassing.

    Posted by: Icebloo | Nov 13, 2012 5:13:18 PM


  7. GAYALLTHEWAY wrote: "Seeing this really makes you appreciate even more the fact that President Obama won the re-election. He needs to start vetting qualified people to be nominated to the SCOTUS that will stay there for at least the next 25 - 30 years."

    I'm quite sure Obama already has a list of Supreme Court prospects; every president does. Whether we will like them is another matter, of course.

    Posted by: Profe Sancho Panza | Nov 13, 2012 5:23:05 PM


  8. ICEBLOO: Well, there would HAVE to be a total system overhaul if you want EVERY citizen to be able to bring a case before the Supreme Court; passing a law wouldn't do it, because at present hearing every case is a logistical impossibility.

    Posted by: Booker | Nov 13, 2012 7:58:04 PM


  9. The reason the Supreme Court may choose to not hear the Proposition Eight case is that it is dependent on a very unlikely chain of events. There was an initiative (Prop 8) and a court case regarding the previous Prop 22, and the court case ended in a decision overturning Proposition 22 a few months before the vote on Proposition 8. Proposition 8's sole effect was to take away a right that had been granted by the court, and there is no way they can contest that statement because what Proposition 8 did was to take the exact wording of the addition to the family code due to Proposition 22 and put it in the state constitution. The only reason to do that is to prevent the state supreme court from declaring the restriction unconstitutional, and the timing of the events (court decision versus the election) was such that Proposition Eight ended up taking away an existing right.

    The chances of this chain of events occurring is pretty low, so the Supreme Court has an incentive to pick a different case.

    Posted by: Bill | Nov 13, 2012 8:14:24 PM


  10. They're deciding whether or not to take these on my birthday!!!!

    O pleeze, give my best friend in SF a reason to organize an after-party for my CA marriage (even tho' I'll be older and grayer if it ever is recognized in AZ....)

    Jake
    PHX

    Posted by: Jake | Nov 14, 2012 1:16:47 PM


  11. @Jake
    My fiancé is a Phoenician. It would be helpful if Arizona would ultimately respect our marriage, but so long as the Feds will, that is a secondary consideration.

    What the delay puts in mind for me (help! Ari)is whether the Supreme Court has a filibuster option: can they delay indefinitely a response to a petition for certiorari? Is there some point, if SCOTUS declines to say whether they will review Prop 8, where Boies and Olsen can go back to the 9th District and ask them to lift their temporary restraining order?

    Posted by: Rich | Nov 14, 2012 4:11:03 PM


  12. The chances of this chain of events occurring is pretty low, so the Supreme Court has an incentive to pick a different case.

    Posted by: idateasian | Nov 16, 2012 1:00:35 AM


  13. I think the 9th Circuit reached the right decision for the wrong reason. The circuit said that a state cannot delete a right from its own state constitution. While that decision is a win for our side, it cannot be correct.

    Clearly, a state may grant protections beyond those provided in Federal law, or not, as the state wishes. Prop 8 is unconstitutional because it violates 14th amendment equal protection, not because a State may not change its own constitution. But, of course, that is just one citizens opinion...

    I would like to see the take this case, even though it would be an additional delay for couples in California. I live in Florida. The only way Florida will ever allow us to marry, or recognize marriages performed elsewhere, is after the Supreme Court says it must. I would like that to happen during my lifetime.

    Posted by: Steve | Nov 20, 2012 1:27:59 AM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Jon Stewart Tries to Break Down Mike Huckabee's Opposition to Gays Marrying: VIDEO« «