What is new on the Gay Marriage front?

[T-Rexx]

Here's something new on the gay marriage front.

George H. W. Bush served as a witness at the gay marriage of Bonnie Clement and Helen Thorgalsen in Maine over the last weekend.

 

[Just_Believe18]

^ In the end, all the Republican politicians are hypocritical lovers of the gays. The bastards.

 

[Ninja108]

Democrats are not necessarily liberal, especially away from the Northeast and West Coast, though in New Mexico they are tepidly liberal. If NM had a Democratic governor, there would have been a real chance at passing a same sex marriage law this year.

Indeed they aren't,and even if they are,doesn't mean they are pro gay marriage. Illinois should be proof of that.

 

[Alnitak]

Indeed they aren't,and even if they are,doesn't mean they are pro gay marriage. Illinois should be proof of that.

We probably have close to 80% of the Democrats in the House. The rest of the high numbered districts are downstate, which is wedged between Missouri, Indiana, and Kentucky, so no surprise there.

 

[Ninja108]

Speaking of Illinois,the judge just ruled the lawsuit against the ban will proceed. One way or another,Illinois will have marriage equality very soon.

 

[Alnitak]

Speaking of Illinois,the judge just ruled the lawsuit against the ban will proceed. One way or another,Illinois will have marriage equality very soon.

It's a standard ruling in most cases. The defense will seek a dismissal, and the judge usually does not issue one for each count.

The case in Illinois was not dismissed, but some of the counts were.

 

[Ninja108]

CHristie appealed in NJ like we all knew he would,the only "good news" is that he's asking it to be fast tracked straight to the State Supreme Court which means this whole thing could be settled sooner versus later.

 

[scream4ever]

CHristie appealed in NJ like we all knew he would,the only "good news" is that he's asking it to be fast tracked straight to the State Supreme Court which means this whole thing could be settled sooner versus later.

There's a good chance they won't hear the case, and even if they do that either:

-a stay won't be granted

-it'll be resolved without a trial by the 21st of October, thus no stay will be needed

 

[Kulindahr]

Oregon in the spotlight

I just heard it on ABC news, so I hope I got this right: Oregon's governor has directed the counties to honor same-sex marriages from other states. It sounded like this applies only to residents of other states moving to Oregon, at this point.

I'll try to update when I find more.

 

[Rolyo85]

There are marriage equality cases in TWENTY states now, making their way through the system.

Sadly, Michigan didn't do shit today and the judge postponed the decision for February.

 

[Alnitak]

There are marriage equality cases in TWENTY states now, making their way through the system.

Eighteen states have federal challenges; four have state ones. There are amendment repeal proposals in two, but there will be as many as eight in the next three years. It will be a very exciting, if confusing, show to watch in the near future.

Sadly, Michigan didn't do shit today and the judge postponed the decision for February.

Summary judgment is not a privilege, and it was not expected despite media hype. The situation that precipitated in one in New Jersey was due to the unique circumstances there. The criteria for summary judgment at a minimum requires no disputes over facts. Since New Jersey already had a mandatory precedent, and the fact that DOMA was overturned, judgment was granted as a matter of law to Garden State Equality and the plaintiffs.

The Constitution only guarantees due process, which we will get at trial.

Even if we had summary judgment, I guarantee you that the Republican 6th Circuit would have slapped it down. They would have remanded it for trial, which would have just delayed the case by months.

That being said, there is little to worry about. The judge in this case actually asked the plaintiffs to sue for marriage. The case was originally only over adoption.

 

[Kulindahr]

Odd -- I can't find anything about it on the local ABC station's website. There's a piece about the lawsuit filed in Eugene, is all.

But I heard a bit on the radio that sheds light: apparently the governor ordered that marriages from other states be accepted, but one of the couples in the suit was married in Vancouver, B.C., so theirs isn't recognized. Sounds to me like they have a serious complaint.

 

[Ninja108]

By the end of the month,I feel we will have marriage equality in HI and NM,thus bringing the number of states with marriage equality to 15.

 

[HorndogPaul]

thus bringing the number of states with marriage equality to 15.

If that happens that will bring us to 30% of states allowing gay marriage. 10 more still to go just to get to 50% which is roughly the percentage of people who believe there should be marriage equality. So what year/time frame do you guys think it will take for us to get 25 out of 50 states supporting and passing marriage equality? I'm going to guess it will take till 2018. That would be two new states each year for the next 5. Just kinda of random but if HI and NM do this year that is two and I'm hopeful we could keep that trend up at the minimum!

 

[JayHawk]

If that happens that will bring us to 30% of states allowing gay marriage. 10 more still to go just to get to 50% which is roughly the percentage of people who believe there should be marriage equality. So what year/time frame do you guys think it will take for us to get 25 out of 50 states supporting and passing marriage equality? I'm going to guess it will take till 2018. That would be two new states each year for the next 5. Just kinda of random but if HI and NM do this year that is two and I'm hopeful we could keep that trend up at the minimum!

I would like to hold the hope that reciprocity of marriage laws in other states as a precedence will allow a supreme court win before 2018 that would make marriage equal across the country. Once all of these red states have to accept the marriage and provide benefits then they will be clamoring to have the marriage inside their borders along with the associated license fee and economic improvement associated with the marriage industry.

I like to think that but realize the self-proclaimed religious zealots that oppose gay marriage are rarely associated with rational thought.

 

[scream4ever]

By the end of the month,I feel we will have marriage equality in HI and NM,thus bringing the number of states with marriage equality to 15.

NJ as well assuming the state supreme court doesn't issue a stay, which I think is likely.

 

[scream4ever]

Based on how long it takes cases to mature, the Supreme Court is likely to hear the cases in 2016 or 2017. I'd say if they hear and decide before the 2016 elections we'll have 20 states with marriage, while waiting until 2017 will likely then give us 25.

 

[Alnitak]

If that happens that will bring us to 30% of states allowing gay marriage. 10 more still to go just to get to 50% which is roughly the percentage of people who believe there should be marriage equality. So what year/time frame do you guys think it will take for us to get 25 out of 50 states supporting and passing marriage equality? I'm going to guess it will take till 2018. That would be two new states each year for the next 5. Just kinda of random but if HI and NM do this year that is two and I'm hopeful we could keep that trend up at the minimum!

The route to 25 states takes us through amendment campaigns in 2016. The must haves will be amendment repeals in Michigan, Ohio, and Arizona, and at least one federal lawsuit, maybe Pennsylvania or Virginia.

The Nevada case Sevcik v. Sandoval is already at the 9th Circuit, so it's guaranteed to hit the Supreme Court in two years, which could of course close the whole debate, or just leave us with another state.

 

[scream4ever]

The route to 25 states takes us through amendment campaigns in 2016. The must haves will be amendment repeals in Michigan, Ohio, and Arizona, and at least one federal lawsuit, maybe Pennsylvania or Virginia.

The Nevada case Sevcik v. Sandoval is already at the 9th Circuit, so it's guaranteed to hit the Supreme Court in two years, which could of course close the whole debate, or just leave us with another state.

The Supreme Court could also hold off and wait for other circuit courts to rule on the issue in order to get more record on the issue. Also in Pennsylvania there is a case pending in the state court as well.

 

[Kulindahr]

The Supreme Court could also hold off and wait for other circuit courts to rule on the issue in order to get more record on the issue. Also in Pennsylvania there is a case pending in the state court as well.

That's what I expect. It will make far more sense to bundle several cases. I really don't expect SCOTUS to tackle this before 2016, unless it's another case it can rule on in a very narrow fashion.