Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama administration will file brief in Prop 8 case (101 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm wondering (0+ / 0-)

    if the rethugs on the Supreme Court may use this to try to eke a little more national division out of gay marriage...

    Can you imagine what would happen in the 30+ states that passed constitutional bans on gay marriage if the Supremes pass an unconditional "gay marriage is a constitutional right" verdict?  Fodder for elections for years to come...and since most conservatives really don't give a shit about gay anything except how to use it to trick gullible Jesus-freaks into voting against their own interests, it's almost a perfect setup.

    The "gay" issue has in recent years waned in effectiveness, because once you have a state constitutional ban it's hard to drum up extra support in an election with no anti-fag issues on the ballot, which is why they've moved to anti-abortion.

    Republican threats amount to destroying the present if we don't allow them to destroy the future too. -MinistryOfTruth, 1/1/2013

    by sleipner on Thu Feb 28, 2013 at 01:12:13 PM PST

    •  But I don't know that it would work anymore (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AUBoy2007, Mistral Wind, jayden, bythesea

      The last few times they put those things on the ballot, they got defeated. And the same sex marriage initiatives passed.

      It's not 20 yrs ago. It's not even 5 yrs ago.

      If the SC came out and said they have to recognize ALL legal marriages from other states, they'd likely just do so. They might not allow same sex marriage in THEIR state, but they would recognize legal marriages from OTHER states if the SC said they had to.

      And they should.

    •  anti-abortion (6+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      zizi, Mistral Wind, aitchdee, sfbob, jayden, vcmvo2

      doesn't work so well any more either, as the Obama campaign figured out correctly in this ad they ran continually before the election:

    •  The tide's already turning against (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mistral Wind, jayden, bythesea

      many of those folks though -- when you look at the list of companies filing friend of court briefs in support of marriage equality, even the GOP salivates at the idea of those companies bringing jobs and tax revenue into their states. A ruling allowing marriage equality across the board takes them off the hook; they can be "personally" against gay marriage but you know, that whole court thing and all just like with segregation and interracial marriage.

      There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

      by Cali Scribe on Thu Feb 28, 2013 at 01:25:26 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  demographic shifts make that a winning scenario (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      for the left, not the right. that's why the GOP hacks are lining up behind repealing prop 8, just to put a loser issue to bed.

    •  If SCOTUS goes broad (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jayden, bythesea, terrypinder

      And issues a national decision on marriage equality (but they won't) let the Republucans try to make this the next abortion issue. They will fail worse than they have on abortion. And liberals shouldn't fear it if they try and Republucans are moderately successful. In the long run it helps us. When republicans press abortion, what have we gotten? Greater participation of women in government and a greater awareness and willingness to support issues important to women. The near term may hurt, but the long term reward is what counts.

      "Lesbian and gay people are a permanent part of the American workforce, who currently have no protection from the arbitrary abuse of their rights on the job." --Coretta Scott King

      by craigkg on Thu Feb 28, 2013 at 01:35:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Read: "Go back in the closet, gays. Now is not.." (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Khun David, roycej, terrypinder

      "...the time to bring this up.  We'll let you get your rights...  ...eventually.

      Just make sure to give our party a big donation on your way out the door."

      Those days are over, and progressives who continue to talk that way are going to be left in the dust.

      •  even on Daily Kos (4+ / 0-)

        those days are over.

        It's about time I changed my signature.

        by Khun David on Thu Feb 28, 2013 at 03:35:49 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Definitely not one of those (0+ / 0-)

        I was merely speculating on the potential result if they did.  I'm actually gay and getting married later this year in CA (hopefully, depending on the results of the case), or in WA if not.

        Personally I suspect what they will do is to partially invalidate DOMA, making it so that "legally married" people get federal benefits, though they may restrict it somewhat for states that deny marriage.  

        I think they'll overturn Prop 8 on limited grounds, probably trying to craft the decision in such a way to not force any other states to legalize gay marriage.

        The big question is if they'll try to deal with some of the gray areas - like what happens to a legally married couple from MA when they move to a state with constitutional bans on anything resembling gay marriage or domestic partnerships.  I have a feeling they'll leave that question completely unaddressed.

        Republican threats amount to destroying the present if we don't allow them to destroy the future too. -MinistryOfTruth, 1/1/2013

        by sleipner on Fri Mar 01, 2013 at 10:25:57 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Why would they leave that question unaddressed? (0+ / 0-)

          That's just silly, and honestly, it's a kind of perverse "wishful thinking" that goes on here on the DKos.  As I've stated elsewhere, the law generally abhors situations like that, and our Constitution requires that states recognize each other's laws, including others' marriage licenses.  If you think the Court is going to overlook that, well...  ...I'm not sure what I can say.

          Why even bother to take these cases, if they're just going to strike a limited provision of DOMA and narrowly rule on Prop 8 in the way the Ninth Circuit Court already did?

          •  I have so little faith in the current Supremes (0+ / 0-)

            that I believe they would do almost anything if they thought they could get away with it.  I never in my life expected something like Citizen's United to ever happen...

            The national trend of overwhelming and fast growing support for gay marriage is (imo) the only reason they would possibly vote on the correct side on the issue - Scalia Thomas and Alito will of course vote against, but Roberts and Kennedy are both swing votes on the issue.  I think Roberts wants to keep his "legacy" such that it is intact, so I suspect he will vote for gay rights, but will try to water it down sufficiently so he doesn't get crucified by the teabagger crowd and their owners.

            The Supreme Court usually (at least til recently) tries to take a limited stance on most issues, ruling based on the cases before them and what happened during them...fortunately there's a lot of material in these cases, so they'll look bad if they cherry pick and limit the effect and scope of their ruling.

            Republican threats amount to destroying the present if we don't allow them to destroy the future too. -MinistryOfTruth, 1/1/2013

            by sleipner on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 02:01:46 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (122)
  • Community (60)
  • Media (23)
  • Elections (23)
  • Civil Rights (22)
  • Culture (21)
  • Law (21)
  • Environment (21)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Science (19)
  • Labor (18)
  • Economy (17)
  • Marriage Equality (16)
  • Ireland (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Bernie Sanders (15)
  • Hillary Clinton (15)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • Health Care (14)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site