Not much more to say. Kentucky ’ s ban on recognizing same-sex marriages from other states has been ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge. One more step! We may not be last after all!
http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20140212/NEWS10/302120050/Kentucky-ban-gay-marriages-from-other-states-struck-down-by-federal-judge
The article doesn’t say, but I assume this was stayed pending appeal, which the state will almost certainly make?
Nonetheless, I agree with the ruling and am happy for it. Be nice if one of these would work it’s way to the USSC and settle the issue for the whole country.
I totally misread that thread title, and was wondering how narrow minded that federal judge had to be.
More coffee…
We’ll win this battle. This is great.
Yep… me too.
First thought was: What cruel bastard would ban KY to SSM couples?
I just found out yesterday that one of the attorneys who made this happen lives next door to me! I think I’m going to make him cookies. My whole family anxiously awaits the day that my little sister and her wife will be “official.”
Kentucky is ahead of Ohio. I’m ashamed.
In OH your (out-of-state) SS marriage isn’t valid until one of you is dead.
It’s not like the voters of Kentucky did this, Gedd. They just happen to have a right-thinking federal district judge.
OK true, federal judges are appointed. That makes me feel a bit better.
So the right-thinking federal judge wasn’t, you know, actually far-right-thinking.
There’s talk of fast-tracking the Sixth Circuit hearing for Obergefell v. Wymyslo, the Ohio case. I wonder if they might consolidate those cases and address the elephant in the circuit, so to speak.
Which brings up the question I’ve never thought about:
How do cases get consolidated/merged? Who proposes, who MUST agree, can any of the named parties prevent it?
If I think I have an open-and-shut, and somebody says "not so fast - your cases is now tied to this other case and will be adjudicated together, I just might be annoyed.
But why would you be annoyed, if the issues presented in the two cases were identical?
On appeal, the facts are generally not at issue. The questions being decided are ones of pure law. So the appeal is – presumably – only going to be consolidated with other cases as to the specific identically common issues.
I don’t know who, specifically, makes the decision – if I had to hazard a guess, I’d say that it would probably originate with one of the judges assigned to the first appeal and require a majority of the assigned panel.