Skip to main content

View Diary: Federal judge strikes down Utah's gay marriage ban (142 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Just to add ... (13+ / 0-)

    Hopefully Utah will skip the Court of Appeal and take this directly to the SCOTUS.

    Then we stand a very good chance that all 33 of the hold-out states will all lose at once.

    I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
    but I fear we will remain Democrats.

    Who is twigg?

    by twigg on Fri Dec 20, 2013 at 01:43:38 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I'm not sure though (8+ / 0-)

      We might want to wait and see if Scalia and Alito eat some bad manicotti and are forced to retire due to perpetual flatulence. ;-)

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

      by Cali Scribe on Fri Dec 20, 2013 at 01:47:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  the state is supposed to petition for cert, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      having not exhausted its appeals?  That's ridiculous.  There's also an equally good chance at the Supreme Court level that the ruling is upheld on grounds limited to Utah or other later-enacted bans than a nationwide right is found.  

      Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

      by Loge on Fri Dec 20, 2013 at 01:53:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Rachel and her team dug in and found.. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cassandra Waites

      ..some arguments of Scalia that will help same sex couples who are legally married in one state that decide to move to a state that has no same sex marriage civil protections –  it pretty cool stuff

      Scalia’s dissent:
      The Texas statute that undeniably seeks to further the belief of its citizens that certain forms of sexual behavior are immoral and unacceptable.
      ..Bowers [case] held that this was a legitimate state interest. The court today reaches the opposite conclusion. The Texas statute, it says, furthers no legitimate interest.
      ..if moral disapprobation of homosexual conduct is no longer legitimate state interest..what justification could there possibly be for denying the benefits of marriage to homosexual couples
      Rachel: “Right! ..Justice Scalia raised this point in horror ten years ago on the last big gay rights case that had its last majority opinion written by Justice Kennedy. And he [Scalia as paraphrased by Rachel] was saying” -  
      ‘you realize this ruling means gay people are gonna be able to get married..right? Do you realize that?’

      Rachel: “Yes! Justice Scalia we realize that. And indeed Justice Kennedy today cited that ten year old ruling twice, when he wrote today that the Federal government has to recognize all marriages that are recognized in the states, even if some of them have the gay

      It’s a very good report from beginning to end - Scalia’s Lawrence v Texas quotes begin @ minute ~ 8:00  
      (short commercial – sorry)

      In Scalia’s dissent on DOMA ruling 6/25/2013:

      ..the view that this Court will take of state prohibition of same sex marriage is indicated beyond today’s opinion…
      how easy it is indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same sex couples marital status.
      "indicated beyond today's opinion"

      Sounds like Scalia own bigoted reasoning can and will be used practically word for word  to defeat his own objections to same sex couples having equal protection under the law in every state – good deal

      “Hoist with his own petard” - A petard was a small bomb used to blow up gates and walls when breaching fortifications, of French origin and dating back to the sixteenth century.

      Lol – I like the root of the word in Scalia’s case

       Petard etymology:: Petard comes from the Middle French peter, to break wind, from pet expulsion of intestinal gas, from the Latin peditus, past participle of pedere, to break wind, akin to the Greek bdein, to break wind (Merriam--Webster).

      Transcript @ link:

      My comment @ Daily Kos:

    •  In what is sometimes laughingly called reality (0+ / 0-)

      Federal judge backs same-sex marriages in Utah; state to appeal

      Utah will appeal the ruling to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, Ryan Bruckman, a spokesman for the state attorney general's office, said in a telephone call to the Los Angeles Times. He said the state will also seek an emergency stay to prevent any gay marriages from taking place.

      Even as he spoke, at least one county clerk in Salt Lake County has begun issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

      The state’s attorney general’s office did not have an immediate comment on whether it will seek an appeal in the case.

      Muddy enough?

      The Tenth Circuit's Web Site (link above) says

      The territorial jurisdiction of the Tenth Circuit includes the six states of Oklahoma, Kansas, New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah, plus those portions of the Yellowstone National Park extending into Montana and Idaho.
      This is nothing like the Liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld the overturning of Prop. 8 in California.

      Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

      by Mokurai on Fri Dec 20, 2013 at 07:12:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site