Breaking: US Supreme Court to take up same-sex marriage issue

And crying at the same time. There's a lot of uncertainty about which way the justices will go.

Justice Kennedy is essentially a libertarian in outlook.

If it's 5-4, I can reasonably imagine he'd side with the more liberal Justices. Don't forget, he also authored the decision in Lawrence vs. Texas so there's reason to be optimistic.

However, I will say that if the Supreme Court strikes down every state's law banning gay marriage, you can most assuredly count on wingnut heads exploding across the land, from sea to shining sea, with the force of the Tsar Bomba nuclear test. I'd respectfully suggest that you might want to make sure you're not anywhere near wingnut-populated areas. Could be dangerous.

As for me, though I'm overseas, I certainly would be delighted if ALL the anti-SSM laws were struck down, as many of my LGBT friends back in the States could get married if they so choose. And of course, MOAR WINGNUT TEARZ !!!!

Many libertarians are pro-choice, for example, yet oppose Roe vs. Wade.

and like you said, many libertarians, while opposed to Roe v. Wade, are pro-choice.

It's a tough call. I hope that it ends up like Lawrence v. Texas, a 6-3 decision. I'd even be happy with 5-4 in support of SSM.

I guess we'll all have to wait until June 2013 to find out, in any event. I'll keep my fingers crossed.

I hope the move isn't too premature. Our society has moved greatly in favor of supporting gay marriage and I hope that the supreme court favors the right direction in its decision.

However, if the supreme court decision is in favor of gay marriage, this could greatly speed things up.

......in my dreams.

He HATES the idea of homosexuality.

“Homosexual sodomy? Come on. For 200 years, it was criminal in every state.”
“we need not fear judicial imposition of homosexual marriage,”

He had all sorts of opinions in Lawrence vs. Texas. None of them helpful.

However the Court rules, the "discussion" will continue. The best to be expected is that the law will no longer impede human happiness.

-- Mal

It would be a big step in the right direction, but it's sad to think that this would hardly be the end of the struggle.

Given the current composition of the SCOTUS?

didn't go through the Referendum process again to get Prop. H8 overturned. The whole idea was to get it to the SC and set a precedent (hopefully, in SUPPORT of marriage equality).

With this case being in the hands of a rightward leaning court. But I have faith in Kennedy, since he has a track record of lgbt fairness.

I think both will vote to strike down DOMA and also to deny standing on the Prop. 8 case. The only way you could vote otherwise, IMO, is if you were strongly homophobic.

that goes down in history as a homophobe?

The 4 liberals, Kennedy-the swing vote, Scalia-the strict constitutionalist, and Roberts because being fair and compassionate are within him and are a bigger reason than protecting a legacy.

I DO believe in fairness; I DO believe in fairness; I DO believe...

He's intensely homophobic as revealed by earlier decisions, and he doesn't mind being inconsistent. Many of his previous decisions conflict logically with one another. He doesn't mind being a hypocrite.

I've watched him speak on many forums/interviews etc on C-Span over the years and while he uses brutish intellect to contort anything to fit his strict constitutionalist paradigm, weirdly this actually makes him internally consistent.

Judges ARE able to set aside their personal biases and vote fairly and gay marriage rights are like low lying fruit as far as constitutionality goes. He doesn't have to reach or contort, so I am still going to hope that this will be one of his few decisions I will end up admiring.

If you are right, though, I will prostrate myself in a thread dedicated to your wisdom and insight.

edited to add this link for the article titled "Same-sex marriage symposium: Justice Scalia’s constitutional case for gay marriage" which shows how Scalia, following his own logic, could use choice #3 to rule in favor of gay marriage.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/09/same-sex-marriage-symposium-justice-scalias-constitutional-case-for-gay-marriage/

the constitution.

Check out this link for an overview that's far too kind to him:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Court/Antonin_Scalia_Civil_Rights.htm

Yep I have been reading about him. Most of the time he sides with the lgbt side

I'm really not sure which would have been better. Waiting for each of the circuits to rule or having SCOTUS take up the matter. So far it seems the federal courts have pretty consistently ruled DOMA unconstitutional across the country. One of the reasons SCOTUS is compelled to take up a case is if the issue at hand has been ruled on differently in the different circuits. Then SCOTUS can resolve the issue and give a ruling the circuits will have to follow consistently across the country. So what is legal or illegal in CA is similarly so in FL. Citizens don't have to figure out major things too much state by state then.

I really don't see the same-sex marriage issue as different than the anti-miscegenation laws issue in Loving vs. Virginia. DOMA establishes a suspect class of people who have traditionally been discriminated against and prevents them from civil recognition of their unions. My opinion and many other's is DOMA is, in fact, rooted in religious bigotry. This is unconstitutional under the First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment.

I can't think of any compelling reason the US has to prevent same-sex couples from being married in civil marriages. Marriage in the US is a civil contract. Not a religious matter. Remember the Justice of The Peace or any Judge can marry a couple with no requirement for a church or religious ceremony. The religious church stuff is all just ritual. Seriously, you can get married at a drive-through in Vegas. Just ask Brittany Spears.

And now for the snark:

And on the Brittany Spears note let me point out once again the opposition to same-sex marriage is woefully inadequate arguing same-sex marriage flies in the face of the sanctity of marriage. When Spears can have a 72-hour marriage and Kim Kardashian can have a one month marriage both followed by divorce and the divorce rate is between 40% and 50% of all marriages in the US it seems heterosexuals don't need any help from us homos assailing the sanctity of marriage. They're doing just fine on their own.

<snip>

In 2007, Edith "Edie" Windsor and Thea Spyer, residents of New York, married in Toronto, Ontario, after 40 years of romantic partnership. Spyer died in 2009, at which time New York legally recognized same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. After Spyer's death, Windsor was required to pay more than $363,000 in federal estate taxes on her inheritance. If federal law accorded their marriage the same status as different-sex marriages recognized by their state, she would have paid no taxes.

<snip>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windsor_v._United_States

Since the AHA was constitutional because of it being a tax, will they use an unfair tax burden as a way of making DOMA unconstitutional.

basically to that specific situation.

Here it is folks. k&r

There are too many people living in a legal limbo because they have married in one state and moved to another that does not recognized the union.

We shall see.

Prop 8 should be shot down dead. It is unconstitutional to deny any group of persons their rights. Period.

tell consenting adults who they can and cannot marry. It just doesn't makes sense.

just bigots in a different time... they have consistantly been oppressive throughout time.

The good news is that when he was in San Francisco he had a couple of openly gay law clerks who worked for him.

I grew up a homophobe but life experience showed me I was wrong. Gay people are just that - they're people. Working and interacting with people I knew were gay really changed a lot for me.

I was taught by my parents to treat everyone with respect and dignity. I don't know why it took me so long to realize that this also applied to how I treat the LGBT community as well.

Anyways, I'm on board with everyone else here. I hope for another victory as well

It could top last year's announcements.

Among the reactions to the announcement Friday that the Supreme Court would consider a pair of laws related to same-sex marriage, supporters of marriage equality say they believe even the conservative high court will uphold their views. - See more at: http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2012/12/10/marriage-equality-supporters-dont-fear-court-challenge/#sthash.rFO1JEOJ.dpuf