Obama has 24 hours left to file Prop 8 brief. Will he?

[MNBrewer]

With 24 hours left before the final deadline to file a brief in the upcoming historic Supreme Court case deciding whether California’s Proposition 8 (Prop 8), which repealed the right of gay couples to marry in that state, is constitutional, it is still unclear if the Obama administration will file.

http://americablog.com/2013/02/prop-8-brief-obama-deadline.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AMERICAblogGay+%28AMERICAblog+Gay%29

[nonoyes]

1. Not to question the need but a serious question:

How often do Presidents, themselves, file briefs in Supreme Court cases?

The Solicitor General usually appears or files on behalf of the Executive Branch, I belive, but I could be wrong.

[MNBrewer]

2. Is that really a serious question?

[nonoyes]

3. Yes, it was a serious question, do you have an answer? nt

[MNBrewer]

5. Obama administration to express support for gay marriage before Supreme Court

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/28/17134418-obama-administration-to-express-support-for-gay-marriage-before-supreme-court?lite

[nonoyes]

6. Thanks!

Perhaps next time you could update the headline of this thread and could be a bit more precise in your wording, next time, if, indeed, you did not mean President Obama, himself, but rather his administration.

[nonoyes]

4. BREAKING.....

Pete Williams ?@PeteWilliamsNBC
Obama Justice Dept to file Supreme Court amicus brief today opposing Prop 8 in Calif and expressing support for same-sex marriage to resume.

[struggle4progress]

7. Obama administration urges Supreme Court to strike down Prop. 8

By Christi Parsons and David G. Savage This post has been updated, as indicated below.
February 28, 2013, 4:51 p.m.

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration has endorsed a constitutional right to marry for gays and lesbians, urging the Supreme Court to strike down California’s voter-passed law barring same-sex marriage as well as laws in at least the seven other states that already provide civil unions.

“Tradition, no matter how long established, cannot by itself justify a discriminatory law,” the administration said in a brief filed with the high court late Thursday. “Prejudice may not be the basis for differential treatment under the law.”

The administration’s argument struck a legal middle ground – giving the justices a way to overturn California’s Proposition 8 without upsetting the laws in all states that currently ban same-sex marriage. Gay-rights advocates have asked the court to strike down all laws nationwide that bar same-sex couples from marrying, but many legal analysts have doubted that a majority of the justices would go that far ...

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-supreme-court-prop-8-20130228,0,3844832.story

[struggle4progress]

8. Justices Should End California Gay Marriage Ban, U.S. Urges

By JOHN SCHWARTZ and ADAM LIPTAK
Published: February 28, 2013

The Obama administration threw its support behind a broad claim for marriage equality on Thursday, and urged the Supreme Court to rule that voters in California were not entitled to ban same-sex marriage in that state.

In a sweeping argument, the administration argued that denying gay and lesbian couples the right to marry violates the Constitution’s equal protection clause, and that any ban on same-sex marriage should be subjected to a test known as “heightened scrutiny” – a test that the law would be likely to fail. That argument is similar to the one made in the administration’s brief in a second case before the Supreme Court concerning the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, which the administration has also asked the court to declare unconstitutional ...

The brief notes that opponents of same-sex marriage in the California case have argued the state offers, through the equivalent of domestic partnerships, a marital state in all but the name. That logic must be rejected under the equal protection clause, the government said. The government also points out that seven other states -- Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon and Rhode Island — have a similar all-but-marriage framework, through it does not call explicitly for the court to strike down the laws in those states. The implication of its argument, however, is clear.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. issued a statement that tied the government's argument into the fundamental struggle against discrimination and for civil rights, saying that the brief "seeks to vindicate the defining constitutional ideal of equal treatment under the law." He said that the court's decisions concerning the two same-sex marriage cases "are not just important to the tens of thousands Americans who are being denied equal benefits and rights under our laws, but to our nation as a whole” ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/us/politics/administration-to-urge-justices-to-overturn-a-gay-marriage-ban.html?pagewanted=all