Skip to main content

View Diary: Supreme Court puts Utah marriage equality on hold for now (363 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Functionally, yes, (4+ / 0-)

    of course with the cloud of having those marriages annulled by a later ruling hanging over their heads.

    I suppose an argument can be made that the state is burdened with the bureaucratic entanglements of having to record those marriages, or that it's an infringement on the state's ability to self-govern.

    It's not an argument I'd make.

    But in simplistic terms, what I'm saying is that this is standard procedure for how the process of these cases work their way through the system. It doesn't reflect on Sotomayor.

    "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

    by raptavio on Mon Jan 06, 2014 at 09:03:05 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I guess I'm not as concerned about the "cloud" (3+ / 0-)

      as other people.

      Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. --Edward Abbey

      by greenbastard on Mon Jan 06, 2014 at 09:13:42 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well, I am, (2+ / 0-)

        but not so much that if I had my druthers I'd like to see there be no stay in the interim.

        But that's not my point. My point is that the "she took away the right now, so she wouldn't have to later" line is a gross mischaracterization of what's going on.

        "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

        by raptavio on Mon Jan 06, 2014 at 09:34:30 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  but that's the only explanation that's given (0+ / 0-)

          it's not as if every stay is granted. Plus there were no dissents. I don't know. I would think erring on the side of civil liberties would be the default and what should be applauded.

          Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. --Edward Abbey

          by greenbastard on Mon Jan 06, 2014 at 09:44:33 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  That's not how it works. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Phoenix Woman, JerryNA

            The likelihood of a stay being granted is directly proportional to the magnitude of the ultimate decision. That's the barometer.

            That is NOT the only explanation given; I just spent more time than I apparently ought have giving you a more detailed one.

            "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

            by raptavio on Mon Jan 06, 2014 at 09:46:09 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I don't think you've given as much as you (0+ / 0-)

              report.

              Again, she alone, could've denied the stay, correct?

              the case would still move forward, correct?

              People who have every right to get married, would still be able to get married. Correct?

              And all of this could be accomplished, if the Justice took a separate route, correct? And no laws would be broken if that route was taken, correct?

              Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. --Edward Abbey

              by greenbastard on Mon Jan 06, 2014 at 09:53:46 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I get it. (3+ / 0-)

                You hold no value in the courts following their procedures when people's rights are at stake. And I sympathize with that point of view.

                However, jurists are usually less inclined to break with tradition. When it comes to rights, they reason that however the case comes down, that it will be resolved one way or the other, and the decision can be enforced at that time.

                What's important for you to understand is that granting this stay is no indicator how any member of the SCOTUS will rule when they inevitably have to rule on this.

                "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

                by raptavio on Mon Jan 06, 2014 at 10:07:52 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  It's a bit more complicated than that. (7+ / 0-)

                Yes, Sotomayor could have denied the stay all on her own if she had chosen to do so.  The disadvantage of that approach would have been that Utah could then have presented a renewed stay application to another justice of its own choosing.  I'm sure they'd have picked Scalia or Thomas in the hope of getting a favorable ruling.  Then a stay might have been issued anyway without the full court getting the chance to weigh in.

                By doing it this way, Sotomayor allowed the full court to vote on the issue.  It looks like they've all concluded a stay should be imposed.  That's not really shocking, since courts often impose stays when a case like this is working its way up the judicial ladder.  

                All this does is let the Tenth Circuit consider the case while restoring things to the status quo ante Judge Shelby's decision.  The Tenth Circuit has the case on a fast track, so we should know pretty soon what it decides.

                "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

                by FogCityJohn on Mon Jan 06, 2014 at 10:20:57 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (147)
  • Community (57)
  • Baltimore (38)
  • Civil Rights (37)
  • Bernie Sanders (33)
  • Culture (29)
  • Elections (28)
  • Economy (27)
  • Law (25)
  • Texas (23)
  • 2016 (21)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Environment (19)
  • Labor (19)
  • Education (18)
  • Hillary Clinton (18)
  • Racism (17)
  • Freddie Gray (17)
  • Politics (16)
  • Barack Obama (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site