The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

  • Hi Guest - Did you know?
    Hot Topics is a Safe for Work (SFW) forum.

Gay Marriage Updates By State

My gut feeling is they will go directly to SCOTUS. They know the 9th Circuit is liberal. They won't waste their time, not to mention money. The opposition has always said they are trying to get the SCOTUS as quickly as possible. Once that happens, I believe they will take the case. Again, we will know Tuesday after the court closes...

Everything after that is really just reading tea leaves.

We don't know if Olson and Boies are going to petition for review of the broad district court ruling which the circuit court ignored, a potential procedural error which may result from them ignoring a central part of Walker's ruling and findings of fact. We don't know what Kennedy is going to do though we are optimistic. It will be a nail biter to the end!

Every indication I've read has said they want to go to the Supreme Court. After the narrow ruling I wouldn't be surprised if they don't hear the case. Even if they do we will win on those grounds no question.
 
My gut feeling is they will go directly to SCOTUS. They know the 9th Circuit is liberal. They won't waste their time, not to mention money. The opposition has always said they are trying to get the SCOTUS as quickly as possible. Once that happens, I believe they will take the case. Again, we will know Tuesday after the court closes...

Everything after that is really just reading tea leaves.

We don't know if Olson and Boies are going to petition for review of the broad district court ruling which the circuit court ignored, a potential procedural error which may result from them ignoring a central part of Walker's ruling and findings of fact. We don't know what Kennedy is going to do though we are optimistic. It will be a nail biter to the end!

There is a slim possibility that SCOTUS could send it back to the full Ninth because of the way the panel ignored that chunk of Walker's ruling. Then it would have to be heard en banc.

Then it would be really dicey: I'm confident Kennedy will affirm the decision as it is, but not nearly so sure if he was looking at Walker's full deal.
 
Everyone keeps writing off the 4 conservative judges as if they are 100% not going to rule in our favour.

Is this a certain thing? I really have no idea, but I trust they won't let their christian views interfere with their duty to the law and the constitution.

By the way, I went over all of Kennedy's rulings for anything relating to gays and how he is known as a swing vote. I agreed with all of his rulings which makes me believe I have a better understanding of him.

I think the Kennedy and the US constitution is on our side.
 
Everyone keeps writing off the 4 conservative judges as if they are 100% not going to rule in our favour.

Is this a certain thing? I really have no idea, but I trust they won't let their christian views interfere with their duty to the law and the constitution.

By the way, I went over all of Kennedy's rulings for anything relating to gays and how he is known as a swing vote. I agreed with all of his rulings which makes me believe I have a better understanding of him.

I think the Kennedy and the US constitution is on our side.

Not at all. Roberts did pro bono work with the plaintiffs in Romer v Evans, and he did refuse to stay the DC marriage law from going into effect when the court case on the referendum was being filed.

Alito when he was a lower court judge ruled in favor of a gay man in a workplace discrimination suit.
 
Everyone keeps writing off the 4 conservative judges as if they are 100% not going to rule in our favour.

Is this a certain thing? I really have no idea, but I trust they won't let their christian views interfere with their duty to the law and the constitution.

By the way, I went over all of Kennedy's rulings for anything relating to gays and how he is known as a swing vote. I agreed with all of his rulings which makes me believe I have a better understanding of him.

I think the Kennedy and the US constitution is on our side.

Scalia makes things up to bolster his reactionary views, and lies about facts that have been presented to the court. I've seen them in his 'hard on crime' stuff, but I have no doubt he applies it elsewhere.

Thomas thinks this is a Christian nation, so to him the Bible (well, his narrow and ignorant view of it) is above the Constitution.


I'll let someone else take one the others; I'll just say I have mixed feelings about Roberts.
 
Not at all. Roberts did pro bono work with the plaintiffs in Romer v Evans, and he did refuse to stay the DC marriage law from going into effect when the court case on the referendum was being filed.

Alito when he was a lower court judge ruled in favor of a gay man in a workplace discrimination suit.

Heh -- you got the two I didn't.

The "Dynamic Duo" think Roberts will do the right thing. One of them's optimistic about Alito. I hope so, and I doubt it, respectively -- but then, how many cases have I argued before the Supreme Court?
 
297159.jpg
 
Very interesting assistive devices/people you are enlisting for this thread, lol.
 
I've done some digging on wikipedia about Roberts and Altio. Altio is described as a conservative justice with a libertarian streak.

I remain confident, but we MUST win at lest 1 state in a referendum for it to be a done deal.

I think we can bag Maine and maybe even Minnesota this year?
 
I've done some digging on wikipedia about Roberts and Altio. Altio is described as a conservative justice with a libertarian streak.

I remain confident, but we MUST win at lest 1 state in a referendum for it to be a done deal.

I think we can bag Maine and maybe even Minnesota this year?

Don't forget about Washington, which is statistically a near certainty.
 
There are tea leaves in the oracle's crystal ball.




The Republicans inclined to vote for repeal in New Hampshire are supposedly libertarian as well, so you never know.

I have not heard that. New Hampshire may be libertarian but obviously there are some Bible thumpers. Regardless it's looking like a vote will not even be taking place.
 
NY Senator James Alesi (R), one of the few Republican State Senators to vote in favor of Gay Marriage in New York last year, is not running for re-election. His party wants him out. As I think I mentioned at the time, he hasn't always been the most politically savvy person in the book, and he was likely doomed, before, but I guess pretty much it now.

Here's a link to the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle forum - if you can get to it - Gannett Rochester is going to subscription only for online.

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20120513/NEWS0217/305130021?source=nletter-topnews

As civil rights martyrs go, Jim Alesi is pretty much a disaster.

A politician with a taste for having things named after himself and a well-earned reputation as kind of a sleaze, Alesi’s vote in favor of gay marriage helped end his career. It also earned him hero status among a great many people who can’t vote in Republican primaries. 1

People like my mother.

State Sen. Alesi, who announced his retirement this week in the face of near-certain defeat in a hypothetical Republican primary, now has the respect of my mom, her wife and countless others, gay and straight.

He also has a one-way ticket back to East Rochester.

Alesi described his decision to retire as borne out of party loyalty. He wanted, he said, to keep the seat Republican. That’s sort of baffling, given that the party pretty clearly wanted him gone, and also pretty self-serving.

“It’s not really about Jim Alesi,” Alesi said, demonstrating the equal-parts blend of false humility, massive ego and factual inaccuracy that can only be honed over two decades in Albany.

In truth, this really is about Jim Alesi — about how he tried to balance support for gay marriage with his party affiliation and lost his seat in the process. 2

But it’s more complicated than that. Because if Alesi had better real-life balance, maybe we wouldn’t be having this discussion at all. Yes, the great complication in all of this — the thing that makes it so hard to unpack — is Alesi’s undignified fall from a ladder in 2008.

That fall, which happened while Alesi was trespassing inside an unfinished home in Perinton, and the truly deranged lawsuit against the home’s owner and builder that followed dimmed Alesi’s re-election prospects horribly.

That 2011 lawsuit, which Alesi filed the day the statute of limitations for trespassing expired, branded Alesi a slimeball in the eyes of many. He withdrew the suit and apologized, but it was too late. Even without the gay marriage vote the next year, Alesi might have been finished.

Would Alesi still have voted for gay marriage had he not taken that tumble, smashing himself up physically almost as badly as the lawsuit did politically? Watch the video of him voting against a gay marriage bill in 2009 and he certainly looks conflicted. But I still don’t know, and I don’t think Alesi knows.

I also don’t think it matters.

My mother and her partner pledged themselves to each other at a commitment ceremony in 2000, when that was their only option. In 2002, they drove to Vermont to enter a civil union. Last year, they were married in Connecticut, where they live.

“I think I like Jim Alesi,” my mother wrote to me this week from Connecticut. “Is that wrong?”

I say no. I say whatever combination of personal conviction and political expediency led Alesi to stand up in support of gay marriage, the vote — and the law — are what matter. And anyway, that’s the thing about martyrdom: all the self-serving posturing, all the broken bones and bad decisions, fade away over time. All that’s left is the hill on which you died.

Was Jim Alesi already a dead man walking when he cast that vote? Probably. But it doesn’t matter.

Because if a broken leg and a couple years of public ridicule were the only price I had to pay to see my mother marry the woman she loves, I’d jump off the tallest ladder I could find.
--
He was my State Senator, and I didn't like some of what he did. But I likely would have supported him this year, in thanks for his courage on the vote.
 
Back
Top