Yes, and they will likely rule VERY narrowly with my WAG being that Kennedy writes a 5-4 opinion holding that since a right was taken away, Prop 8 is invalid, but only in California. Leave for another day the question of a nationwide right of gay marriage, and then that “other day” will be after all of the current justices are no longer on the Court. Scalia will write a raving dissent joined by Thomas and Alito, and Roberts will write a separate dissent in less harsh terms trying to be Mr. Cool Chief Justice while repairing his conservative credentials.
As I predicted earlier, SCOTUS does not want another Roe v. Wade type decision that will galvanize the country for years to come. Wait 30 years until it’s not an issue anymore and then rule.
I have not, but I’m out in the boondocks this week and on a dialup connection. Research is difficult.
I can’t imagine an argument that would distinguish a state constitutional amendment as being LESS of a public policy position than a simple statute. How would that be framed?
I would also think that those two cases will have zero effect on the minds of any judge or justice ruling on SSM today except as a cite for a reason to uphold bans on it. IOW, I can’t see Breyer thinking “Gee I think that SSM is a constitutional right, but I must follow this 1934 decision. Shucks.”
Huh. Well, I’m coming in from outwith the US to brag that as well as civil unions, gay marriages are now legal in Scotland (but not the rest of the UK, just to add confusion to the whole UK countries discussions!)
It’s just about two years into the five of Alice’s bet, and it’s looking much more likely she’ll be winning that $10. It’s really amazing to think how much has changed in that time:
19 states plus D.C. have legal SSM, and (I believe) every single state with a ban on SSM has an active legal challenge against that ban. Utah has appealed to the Supreme Court after its ban was declared unconstitutional by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, and other federal district court decisions against bans are pending appeal in five of the seven other circuits where SSM is banned in at least one of the states. The 6th and 7th Circuit Courts will hear those appeals next month. It seems likely the Supreme Court will be compelled to rule on the issue in their next session, and certainly within the next three years.
It is interesting to read this thread two years later. First comment is that things are moving faster then anticipated. Of course we now know that SCOTUS essentially ducked Prop 8 and outlawed DOMA. Nate Silver guessed it would take till the early 2020s for states like AL and MS to act. But now that the circuit that includes Utah has ruled in favor of gay marriage, I don’t think SCOTUS will be able to duck it much longer. Still, I would expect the current court to uphold state bans. If not, I think Alice will lost. Much better if she had said 10 years.
But it is remarkable how quickly public opinion has shifted on this.
Incidentally, marriage is not primarily a religious matter; it is all about property. In the middle ages, in England at least, peasants did not formally marry since there was no property involved. I imagine that is where common law marriage came from.
Right, this is interesting stuff. I’d be surprised if the court didn’t take up this issue in the fall because the lower courts are essentially screaming for it. If so, they’d announce their decision by June and Kennedy’s Windsor decision suggests there could be five voters willing to kill these bans.
Sure. Although Windsor’s language claimed only its narrow effect, the logic used to get there (as Scalia pointed out in his dissent) essentially requires that state bans be struck down as well – and, indeed, almost every federal court that has confronted the issue post-Windsor has ruled in favor of the concept that banning same-sex marriage is impermissible.
In my view, the Supreme Court must either substantially rewrite Windsor, or accept that same-sex marriage bans are untenable.
Really, five years? I think the issue has to make it to the Supreme Court long before that. The only way it wouldn’t is if the Supremes refused to hear the appeals coming from the circuits, and that would make SSM marriage legal in the 10th Circuit, and in fairly short order probably the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 9th as well. (It’s already legal in all states of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Circuits, though not in places like Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.)
A quick bump to note that as of today, the first Monday in October, the SSM state count seems to have risen to 24, with a pretty clear route to 30. When the 9th Circuit rules (and what’s taking them so long?), there could be a route to 35. If that happens, it could still be close for Annie’s bet, but she would still have more than two years to pull in the fifteen holdouts.
+1. Not even the most optimistic of us Dopers predicted it would be a done deal this fast. Think how we would have rolled our eyes at a comment like, “Alice will win the bet easily. The U.S. will completely legalize SSM within three years. Right after Ireland does.”
It’s nice when reality exceeds cynicism in this direction. It doesn’t happen often.
2 posts from July 2012. The first held up reasonably well:
As for the second the Economist once said, “If you must forecast, forecast often.” The polling currently favors gay marriage and support among Millennials tops 70%.
Indeed Justice Alito in his dissent wrung his hands and gripped his skull about how SSM opponents were the true victims: “In the course of its opinion, the majority compares traditional marriage laws to laws that denied equal treatment for African-Americans and women. The implications of this analogy will be exploited by those who are determined to stamp out every vestige of dissent.” Every single vestige! Wow: that’s some quality hysteria. If a liberal, conservative or moderate made this claim about any subject in US public life on this message board they would be grilled, flipped over, and subjected to further ridicule. Justice Alito has expressed stupidity dumber than our dumbest posters: congratulations counselor!
Over at “New posts”, this is the only gay related thread listed AFAICT. When I joined here a poster named Esprix had an “Ask the gay guy” thread. How interesting and novel! In 2004, Democratic Presidential candidate Kerry passed over gay marriage in favor of civil unions. Today, there’s not much of a debate on this subject left on this board.
