supreme court

...now browsing by tag

 
 

How Will the Prop 8 Case Play Out?

Sunday, February 12th, 2012

Prop 8 CaseThree years and three months have now passed since California voters amended their state constitution with Proposition 8, banning same-sex marriage throughout the state. The first legal challenge began the next day, and others followed — first in state court, then in federal court. Many who have been following the case have assumed, perhaps from the beginning, that the controversy would ultimately reach the Supreme Court. After the ballot measure was struck down this month by the Ninth Circuit Court, a California newspaper, the Orange County Register, asked: “Next stop: the Supreme Court?” Maybe not, or, at least, maybe not for a while.

The Ninth Circuit Court has a system (in some ways peculiar to that court) allowing other judges potentially to second-guess a three-judge panel’s decision like this one, and the system does not really depend upon what the lawyers involved ask. The Court can go en banc on its own, in a limited form, and then it can go en banc once again, in a broader form. It might do so in reaction to a request from some of the lawyers involved, or it might do so on its own without waiting for a request. Either way, it could take a considerable amount of time before there is something final to take to the Supreme Court in Washington.

Those who sponsored Proposition 8, and got it approved with a 52.3 percent majority vote among California voters on November 4, 2008, have said they are studying their options, but they definitely have already committed themselves to challenging the three-judge panel ruling at some higher level. There have been some hints, among some in that camp, that they would rather go on to the Supreme Court now, and bypass further review in the Ninth Circuit.

Full Story from Scotusblog

Click here for gay wedding resources in California.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook. We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Will the Supreme Court Use Prop 8 Case to Redefine Gay Rights?

Sunday, February 12th, 2012

Prop 8 CaseNine years ago, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who may soon decide the fate of same-sex marriage in California, pondered the case of two Texas men who had been arrested in an apartment at gunpoint and charged with sodomy.

Seventeen years earlier, and two years before President Ronald Reagan appointed Kennedy to the court, the justices had upheld a law against gay sex in Georgia. One member of the majority, Chief Justice Warren Burger, wrote that the court would have to “cast aside millennia of moral teaching” to find that “homosexual sodomy is somehow protected as a fundamental right.”

But by 2003, Kennedy said, most Americans, and a majority of the justices, had come to realize that gays and lesbians deserve “respect for their private lives” and freedom from government intrusion in their bedrooms.

Full Story from SFGate

Click here for gay wedding resource in California.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook. We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Could Narrow Prop 8 Ruling Backfire With Supreme Court?

Friday, February 10th, 2012

Prop 8 CaseTrying to play to Justice Anthony Kennedy’s gut is a dicey endeavor. So when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit on Tuesday struck down California’s same-sex marriage ban — also known as Proposition 8 — with reasoning clearly designed for a future Kennedy opinion, constitutional lawyers were quick to point out the unintended consequences of the appeals court’s solicitousness.

Judge Stephen Reinhardt, writing for the 9th Circuit majority, chose not to embrace the broad ruling handed down by U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker — that same-sex couples cannot be denied the right to marry, period. Instead, Reinhardt ruled narrowly that Prop 8, which passed by ballot referendum in 2010, violated the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection because it took away, without any rational reason, the right to marry that the California Supreme Court had guaranteed to the state’s gay and lesbian citizens earlier that year.

Reinhardt is known as the most liberal judge on the country’s most liberal appeals court, so it would have been no surprise had he ruled in line with Walker. His refusal to address the broader question in Perry v. Brown appeared to be a deliberate effort to remove the issue from Supreme Court review. It suggests that he thought an argument good enough for one moderate Republican at the bottom of the federal court pecking order (Walker) was too bold for another at the very top (Kennedy).

Full Story from the Huffington Post

Click here for gay wedding resources in California.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook. We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Analysis: What’s Next for the Prop 8 Case?

Thursday, February 9th, 2012

Prop 8 CaseA reader of my blog posting on Tuesday’s 9th Circuit decision in Perry v. Brown, the California Proposition 8 case, asked me to clarify what I meant when I said there is no appeal “as of right” from this decision, so I’ve decided to post my ruminations about whether this case is going further.

This case is over unless either a majority of the judges on the full 9th Circuit Court of Appeals votes to grant a petition for rehearing “en banc” (which in the 9th Circuit’s practice would involve the chief judge and ten other judges drawn at random from the list of active [not retired "senior status"] judges of the Circuit) and/or unless at least four Justices of the United States Supreme Court vote to grant a petition for writ of certiorari. The first question now confronted by the losing party in Tuesday’s decision, the Proponents of Proposition 8, is whether to file a petition for rehearing en banc, or whether to file a petition for writ of certiorari. They do not have to seek rehearing before seeking Supreme Court appeal, but petitioning the Supreme Court would cut off their opportunity to seek en banc review.

If they want to prolong the agony of delaying implementation of District Judge Walker’s injunction against the enforcement of the constitutional amendment created by Prop 8, they would first file for en banc rehearing, which would delay a final decision at the court of appeals level for a substantial period of time if the petition for rehearing is granted, since the grant of such a petition would vacate the panel decision and, most likely, keep the stay in effect while new briefs are filed and a new hearing is scheduled by the 11-judge panel, which then would take some time to render its decision.

Full Story from the NY Law School

Click here for gay wedding resources in California.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook. We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

NJ: Gay Supreme Court Nominee Promised to Recuse Himself From Marriage Equality Cases

Wednesday, February 1st, 2012

New Jersey Marriage Equality BillNew Jersey Governor Chris Christie said his pick to be the first openly gay justice on the state Supreme Court won’t rule on issues involving same-sex marriage.

Christie, a first-term Republican, also said critics, including Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, one of two openly gay New Jersey legislators, are “numbnuts” for comparing him to segregationists for comments he made about civil rights.

The governor last week proposed a referendum on gay marriage. Democratic lawmakers said the issue is a matter of civil rights and shouldn’t be decided by voters. Christie drew criticism from Democrats when he said that “people would have been happy with a referendum on civil rights rather than fighting and dying in the streets of the South.”

Full Story from Bloomberg

Click here for gay wedding resources in New Jersey.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook. We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

VT: Marriage Equality Advocate Joins State Supreme Court

Monday, November 28th, 2011

Vermont Supreme Court(Host) A new justice has joined the Vermont Supreme Court. Governor Peter Shumlin swore in Beth Robinson Monday afternoon as an associate justice. She replaces Denise Johnson, who is retiring.

Robinson is a 46-year-old lawyer and long-time gay rights advocate. She says she’ll decide cases impartially based on the statutes.

(Robinson) “To me, my pledge is to remember the people because to me the only thing that is important is respecting this abstraction that we call the law, is respecting the people who both shape and give life to that abstraction and whose lives are, in turn, shaped by the dictates that the law requires.”
(Host) Since January, Robinson has served as Shumlin’s general counsel.

Full Story from VPR.net

Click here for gay wedding resources in Vermont.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook. We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Prop 8′s Painfully Slow Crawl to the Supreme Court

Thursday, November 24th, 2011

Prop 8 HearingSometimes I wish lawsuits in real life were more like they are on TV. They’d wrap up in days rather than years, and they wouldn’t spend most of that time in the mind-numbing quagmire known as legal procedure. Such is the case with California’s Prop 8 trial, Perry v. Brown.

A quick refresher: Prop 8 is unique among state same-sex marriage bans for a number of reasons, perhaps the biggest being that it was found unconstitutional in federal trial court and is now moving, very slowly, through the appeals process. It’s poised to go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. No other LGBT marriage law has made it this far. This means that California’s 2008 law could determine the fate of same-sex marriage for the whole country.

On Nov. 17, 2011 we all awoke to the cacophonous news that the California Supreme Court had issued a decision that will take Prop 8 to the next critical phase.

Full Story from PrideSource

Click here for gay wedding resources in California.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook. We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Herman Cain Thinks He Can “Overturn the Supreme Court” on DOMA

Sunday, November 20th, 2011

Responding to a question posed by NOM’s Brian Brownshirt, tonight Herman Cain demonstrated an astounding lack of knowledge of how government works. Not one person on the panel bothered to correct him.

Full Story from Joe.My.God

Click here for gay wedding resources.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook. We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

CA: Ruling Puts Prop 8 Case on the Fast Track

Thursday, November 17th, 2011

Prop 8 RulingWe are on the cusp of achieving what we have been fighting for. For countless couples like plaintiffs, Kris Perry & Sandy Steir and Paul Katami & Jeff Zarrillo, marriage equality cannot come quickly enough. Marriage Equality is on its way to victory in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

According to the American foundation for Equality (AFER) the impending ruling is important for a host of reasons:

In a letter to supporters , which includes an appeal for donations, Chad Griffin of the American Foundation for Equality asserts “we are confident that the Court will affirm our historic District Court victory. The anti-marriage Proponents of Prop. 8 failed to present a shred of credible evidence to justify discrimination against gay and lesbian Americans. Marriage is a fundamental right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, plain and simple.”

Full Story from Gay USA

Click here for gay wedding resources in California.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook. We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Ireland: Supreme Court Deals Setback to Marriage Equality Advocates

Sunday, October 23rd, 2011

The fight for marriage equality in Ireland suffered a minor setback yesterday when the Supreme Court ruled against Senator Katherine Zappone and Dr Ann Louise Gilligan on a technical point.

Sen Zappone and Dr Gilligan are currently appealing to the Supreme Court to have their Canadian marriage recognised in Ireland, having lost their case in the High Court in 2006.

At issue yesterday was a request by the couple’s legal team to challenge an Irish law prohibiting same-sex marriage.

Full Story from Gaelick.com

Click here for gay wedding resources.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook. We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.