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

    To register, turn off your VPN; 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.

On-Topic SCOTUS to Hear DOMA and PROP 8 [MERGED]

palbert

palbert

JUB 10k Club
In Loving Memory
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Posts
11,080
Reaction score
8
Points
0
Location
Coastal Downeast Maine
The Supreme Court will hear DOMA and Prop 8.

The court will review California's gay marriage ban, which passed in 2008 and has been struck down by two lower courts. The justices will also hear a challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which prevents the federal government from recognizing state-sanctioned gay marriages.

Windsor v. United States was brought by Edith Windsor, a resident of New York who paid $363,000 in estate taxes after her wife died because the federal government did not recognize their marriage. New York is one of nine states (and the District of Columbia) where gay marriage is legal, so Windsor argues that the federal government is discriminating against her by not recognizing her state-sanctioned marriage.
Click to expand...

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/supreme-court-hear-gay-marriage-cases-201555862.html
 
Re: SCOTUS to Hear DOMA and PROP 8

I gotta say I'm a little shocked they agreed to hear Hollingsworth v Perry, but I'm not nervous. What may happen is they'll simply rule that defendents lacked standing to appeal the case, so Walker's original ruling would stand and same-sex marriage would resume in California nonetheless.
 
Re: SCOTUS to Hear DOMA and PROP 8

NBC News reports the cases will be argued in March 2013, with a decision expected in late June 2013.
 
Re: SCOTUS to Hear DOMA and PROP 8

The case selection hmmmm...

The only thing for them to rule on in Prop 8 is whether the national constitution binds states to uphold equality even if they don't want to. If the answer to that is "yes," it would be the only case they'd need to hear because the final constitutional question would be settled: equality is obligatory.

If their answer is "no," then equality is optional, and it becomes a question of whether states and the Feds are obliged to accept marriage from equality states. They need the DOMA case to answer that one.

I don't think this is the best combination for a clear victory.
 
Re: SCOTUS to Hear DOMA and PROP 8

I'm sure it was discussed to death at the time the prop was actually on the ballot, but I wasn't around for it-- let me say as a Californian that the Prop 8 ads funded by the Knights of Columbus and the various Mormon/religious para-political church pacs and funnelled into California were massively, massively misleading. To the point of being blatantly false and making you believe the law was for something completely different than it actually was. And you couldn't avoid them, they were definitely much more prominent than the ads supporting gay marriage. I don't simply mean they were biased, I mean the entire ad would be about nothing but something like a teacher being told she has to teach kids about being gay and marrying their own gender in school. The entire ad would just be something like that and you'd think the proposition was about mandatory homosexuality education in public schools or something.

I believe even if prop 8's case has issues as a pure civil rights/SCOTUS case... the very unethical funnelling of national money to screw with an in-state election with a completely illicit ad campaign should be examined as illegal.
 
BREAKING: Supreme Court will hear DOMA case and Prop 8 case in 2013

Sorry if this is confused. Just got the email and I've cut my finger pretty good and need to do something about it.

http://www.freedomtomarry.org/What's Happening Now With Marriage

by Adam Polaski on December 7, 2012
BREAKING: Supreme Court will hear DOMA case and Prop 8 case in 2013

Moments ago, the Supreme Court announced in an order that it has decided to hear the Proposition 8 case and a challenge to the so-called Defense of Marriage Act - Windsor v. United States - in 2013. Now, it is more urgent than ever that we make the same strong case for the freedom to marry in the court of public opinion that our advocates are making in the courts of law.
Click to expand...
 
Re: SCOTUS to Hear DOMA and PROP 8

Here's my prediction of how they will rule:

-In Hollingsworth v Perry, they will rule Proponents never had standing, while ignoring the merits of the case. The Supreme Court is very strict with these issues, and the 9th Circuit didn't take it into consideration enough. Walker's original ruling stands and same-sex marriage resumes in California. It's a win-win for the court since it also "kicks the can" down the road a few years in terms of ruling for full marriage equality.

-In Windsor, they will rule BLAG does have standing to appeal, and thus rule on the merits, striking down Section 3 of DOMA.
 
Re: SCOTUS to Hear DOMA and PROP 8

Kennedy and perhaps Roberts will be the swing votes. Scalia,Roberts and Alito will be three automatic votes against us.
 
Re: SCOTUS to Hear DOMA and PROP 8

Going to be landmark case and hope goes our way.
 
Well the cut finger was panic. All is well with a bandage. Huh?
My cut came from trying to fix my car. A neighbor helped.
Now where were we about SCOTUS. y'all are doing fine, thanks.
 
scream4ever said:
I gotta say I'm a little shocked they agreed to hear Hollingsworth v Perry, but I'm not nervous.
Click to expand...

I'm a bit surprised myself -- the easy way for them would have been to leave it alone.

xbuzzerx said:
-- let me say as a Californian that the Prop 8 ads funded by the Knights of Columbus and the various Mormon/religious para-political church pacs and funnelled into California were massively, massively misleading. To the point of being blatantly false and making you believe the law was for something completely different than it actually was. And you couldn't avoid them, they were definitely much more prominent than the ads supporting gay marriage. I don't simply mean they were biased, I mean the entire ad would be about nothing but something like a teacher being told she has to teach kids about being gay and marrying their own gender in school. The entire ad would just be something like that and you'd think the proposition was about mandatory homosexuality education in public schools or something.

I believe even if prop 8's case has issues as a pure civil rights/SCOTUS case... the very unethical funnelling of national money to screw with an in-state election with a completely illicit ad campaign should be examined as illegal.
Click to expand...

As an Oregonian who has suffered through issue campaign after issue campaign with out-of-state money outspending local money by ten or twenty to one, I agree: out-of-state money at the least should be required to follow truth in advertising.

scream4ever said:
Here's my prediction of how they will rule:

-In Hollingsworth v Perry, they will rule Proponents never had standing, while ignoring the merits of the case. The Supreme Court is very strict with these issues, and the 9th Circuit didn't take it into consideration enough. Walker's original ruling stands and same-sex marriage resumes in California. It's a win-win for the court since it also "kicks the can" down the road a few years in terms of ruling for full marriage equality.

-In Windsor, they will rule BLAG does have standing to appeal, and thus rule on the merits, striking down Section 3 of DOMA.
Click to expand...

That would be difficult, because the California Supreme Court decided that the proponents did have standing, and state law is the determiner for state issues.

I agree on Windsor -- that seems the sensible outcome.
 
JockBoy87 said:
This is a matter of federal question, specifically Article III sec. 2 of the US Constitution which lists the parties that are able to sue each other.
Click to expand...

If a state has standing, then shouldn't the people whom that state says have standing also have standing?

Besides that, since the appeal involved the Constitution, doesn't that make it a case of federal law?
 
So glad to see they are finally taking these cases up, especially DOMA. I think social conservatives should be very worried, but on some of the more conservative forums, they appear to be energized by it.
 
JockBoy87 said:
They should not be worried at all, because heteronormativity is a ridiculous thing to be worried about.
Click to expand...

Rationally that's very true. On the other hand we're talking about people who thought Ellen being on television would turn people gay through the airwaves.
 
JockBoy87 said:
While influential, the state court has no legal effect on federal courts. The state court determined that the defendants had the right to step in for the state, but the state court does not determine that right for the federal government when it is a matter of federal question. See Federal Preemption.

I would point you to the record of the live blog on prop8trialtracker. Look for the discussion starting @ 4:31.

Practically, if the federal court did not find that right for the defendants in Perry, then that would mean the executive branch of government has immense power to overturn laws. I doubt they will dismiss because of lack of standing, unless they really really do not want to decide the issue on the merits now.
Click to expand...

Aren't "side effects" fun? Sometimes they're more the issue than the actual issue.
 
We''ll have to wait and see..crossing my fingers and hoping for the best
 
It bothers me a bit that all the hate group people are gleefully pointing out that if SCOTUS wanted to strike down Prop 8, they'd just not take the case. At the same time, I believe this is wishful thinking on their part. A SCOTUS decision to overturn Prop 8 could potentially forbid ANY state to strike down already established marriage equality laws.

Or maybe that's MY wishful thinking. I liked a clip I saw - on Fox of all places - where some woman who I don't know was explaining to Fat Fuck Brian Brown that no, it doesn't take any "reading into the constitution", it takes "just reading it".

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top