HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Gender & Orientation » LGBT (Group) » Live SCOTUS Blog - Will t...

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:04 PM

Live SCOTUS Blog - Will today be the day they decide?

It's anticipated that a decision will be made today whether they'll hear the DOMA and Prop. 8 cases today. You can watch the live blogging at:

http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/12/live-blog-anticipating-orders-hopefully-regarding-same-sex-marriage-sponsored-by-bloomberg-law/

23 replies, 1685 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 23 replies Author Time Post
Reply Live SCOTUS Blog - Will today be the day they decide? (Original post)
MineralMan Dec 2012 OP
MineralMan Dec 2012 #1
MineralMan Dec 2012 #2
MineralMan Dec 2012 #3
MineralMan Dec 2012 #4
MineralMan Dec 2012 #5
MineralMan Dec 2012 #6
MineralMan Dec 2012 #7
MineralMan Dec 2012 #8
MineralMan Dec 2012 #9
longship Dec 2012 #10
MineralMan Dec 2012 #13
longship Dec 2012 #16
dballance Dec 2012 #11
MineralMan Dec 2012 #23
MineralMan Dec 2012 #12
MineralMan Dec 2012 #14
MineralMan Dec 2012 #15
MineralMan Dec 2012 #17
MineralMan Dec 2012 #18
MineralMan Dec 2012 #19
MineralMan Dec 2012 #20
MineralMan Dec 2012 #21
MineralMan Dec 2012 #22

Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:13 PM

1. Nothing so far. Still waiting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:21 PM

2. Latest Post:

2:19
Lyle: No cases have been denied yet on the marriage issue. The common expectation, though not predictably certain, is that if any marriage case is granted, all of the rest will just sit until the rulng comes out. It would be a surprise if any of the others are denied outright. BTW any orders out today probably will not include any denials; denials usually come in the Monday orders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:26 PM

3. Latest Post:

2:25
Tom:
The Court has to decide which kind of case(s) to take up – DOMA, California’s Prop 8, or the Arizona statute. And among the DOMA cases, it has to decide which petition to grant.

It takes four votes to do any of those things. So getting everyone on (roughly) the same page takes some time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:28 PM

4. Latest Post:

2:27
Lyle: Many readers are focused on Prop. 8. The situation right now: it remains pending, has not been granted, has not been denied, may not appear at all on any orders list today or Monday. If there is nothing by Monday, the 9th Circuit's stay of is decision remains in place, and no marriage licenses can be issued in CA to same-sex couples.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:31 PM

5. Latest Post:

2:31
Tom: In terms of what’s going on inside the building, here is how the process works. After the Justice finish meeting, the junior Justice (Kagan) tells the Clerk’s Office what the Court has decided to do. The Clerk’s Office then drafts orders. Those are reviewed by the Chief Justice for approval. The Clerk’s Office then publishes the final document.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:37 PM

6. Note: I'm only posting the most important posts.

There are lots of others, but none are directly related. If you want to see them all, click the link in the OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:38 PM

7. Latest Post:

2:37
Lyle: On Prop. 8 once more: the 9th CA stay is still in place. The mandate has not been issued in that case. Everything is on hold until SCt does something or other on the pending petition (12-144). City of San Fran has asked 9th CA to give 24 hours notice before it issues the mandate (after SCt denies or rules), so city can prepare for the expected crush at City Hall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:39 PM

8. Latest Post:

2:39
Tom: As Lyle points out, are also some other serious cert petitions that need to be addressed. Those really cannot be put off, both because that isn’t the Justices’ style, and because (as noted) this is the last Conference at which they can grant cases to be argued in March (which has 6 argument slots unfilled).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:40 PM

9. Latest Post:

2:40
Lyle: The Court has NO obligation to act now or at any time on any pending petition, marriage or not. At some time, it will feel a duty to dispose of the cases brought to it. But it has an incredibly wide discretion as to when and how. It has almost complete control over its docket.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:40 PM

10. Don't announcements normally come on Monday or Wednesday?

And usually in the AM?

IIRC.

I mean, somebody please shed some light on SCOTUS culture.

What is normal here?

This isn't an emergency appeal. When would they normally announce?

Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #10)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:56 PM

13. They often announce that they will hear a case on Friday.

Apparently, denials are usually announced on Monday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #13)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:12 PM

16. Thanks. I'll stay tuned. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:47 PM

11. It Really Scares Me to Think About the Roberts Court Taking up These Cases

I'm really not sure which is better. Waiting for each of the circuits to rule or having SCOTUS take up the matter. So far it seems the federal courts have 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 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 has 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 assailing the sanctity of marriage. They're doing just fine on their own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Reply #11)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:21 PM

23. Yes. It's going to be tense. Still, the Prop.. 8 case is pretty straightforward,

so I fully expect a 5-4 decision to let the lower court ruling stand, enabling marriage equality in California. The DOMA case is also a California one.

We may know by June, but no earlier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:48 PM

12. Latest Post:

2:47
Kali: 6,852 readers right now, BTW.

Many people are watching this live blog. - MM

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:57 PM

14. Latest Post:

2:56
Tom:
(Everyone should hope that the Court acts soon. Because when we run out of Supreme Court topics to discuss, I start with the show tunes.)

Humor. -MM

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:59 PM

15. Sadly, I have to leave for a while.

The live blogging continues at the link in the OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:14 PM

17. Latest Post:

3:13
Lyle:
We have the orders now. Prop. 8 is grantred. So is Windsor. Those are the only two marriage cases granted.


Apparently that means that the Prop. 8 case and one of the DOMA cases will be heard. That means no immediate marriage in CA, If this is correct. Crap. I was hoping they'd deny the Prop. 8 case. This will slow everything down. -MM

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:15 PM

18. Latest post:

3:15
Lyle: Prop. 8 is granted on the petition question -- whether 14th Am. bars Calif. from defining marriage in traditional way. Plus an added question: Whether the backers of Prop.. 8 have standing in the case under Art. III.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:17 PM

19. Latest Post:

3:16
Kali:
Our case page for Prop 8. is here:

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/hollingsworth-v-perry/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:18 PM

20. Latest Post:

3:17
Lyle: In Windsor, the government petition (12-307) is the one granted. In addition to the petition question -- whether Sec. 3 of DOMA violates equal protection under 5th Amendment, there are two other questions: does the fact that government agreed with the 2d CA decision deprive the Court of jurisdiction to hear and decide the case, and whether BLAG (House GOP leaders) has Art. III standing in this case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:18 PM

21. Latest Post:

3:18
Lyle:
There are three other grants: a case on preemption of city towing laws (12-52), the Oxford Health case on class arbitration (12-135), and the FTC petition on the brand name reverse payments issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:19 PM

22. And that does it for me.

The waiting begins again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread