Skip to main content

View Diary: Utah goes to SCOTUS, Indiana governor's office orders workers to ignore pro-marriage ruling (61 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Mississippi formally ratified the 13th amendment (13+ / 0-)

    in 2013.  They actually tried do do it in 1995, but there was a procedural screw-up.

    "Taxes are what we pay for civilized society, including the chance to insure" - Oliver Wendell Holmes, Compania General De Tabacos De Filipinas v. Collector of Internal Revenue, 275 U.S. 87, 100, dissenting; opinion

    by HugoDog on Wed Jul 09, 2014 at 01:58:23 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  The last states to enter the late 1800s (7+ / 0-)

      Sunday mornings are more beautiful without Meet the Press.

      by deben on Wed Jul 09, 2014 at 02:25:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Nate Silver built a model in 2009 (10+ / 0-)

      right after the Iowa Supreme Court decision in favor of Marriage Equality that suggested that public opinion would tip in every state by 2024. Alabama and Mississippi were contending for last place. Some state officials have said so openly this year.

      I am certain that it will not be enough to have decisions in every circuit. Some states will insist on going back to their circuit claiming that their circumstances are different from the others. Even after we have definitive decisions, some states will go back to court again, just as Ken Cuccinelli tried to get permission from the courts to reinstate Virginia's anti-sodomy laws even after the definitive Supreme Court decision. Some states will allow marriages, and then look for loopholes to avoid providing full rights to the married.

      Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

      by Mokurai on Wed Jul 09, 2014 at 03:37:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think at this point (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        oldpotsmuggler, duhban, bythesea, Ahianne

        we're moving a lot faster than even Nate could imagine. Some states may be dragged kicking and screaming, but I think we'll have marriage equality as the law of the land well before the 2016 election season -- and once people see that marriage equality doesn't lead to plagues of frogs, locusts, or interior decorators, they'll mostly shrug it off except for the hard-liners who are dying out anyway.

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

        by Cali Scribe on Wed Jul 09, 2014 at 06:01:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Legally, expect the last domino to fall by 2016. (9+ / 0-)

        That's what a lawyer who is deeply involved in the process has told me.

        There is at least one legal action in every non-equal state right now.  North Dakota was the last state where someone hadn't filed a lawsuit challenge against the anti-equality legislation in that state, and as of last month someone has.

        The thing is that the main backers of bigotry, the leaders of the NOM, have gotten their asses kicked six ways from sundown, even by the Roberts SCOTUS. Even their claim to standing has been called into question.  

        As the various pieces of existing state-level pro-equality legislation withstand challenge after challenge, they provide templates for other states to follow.  More importantly, as the weaknesses of the anti-equality position are made ever clearer with each court defeat, the momentum is on the side of equality.

        Visit for Minnesota news as it happens.

        by Phoenix Woman on Wed Jul 09, 2014 at 06:12:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Mississippi and Tennessee have only (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ebohlman, Ahianne

          Federal cases asking for recognition of out-of-state marriages, not full Marriage Equality cases. It has been reported for some time that such cases have been in preparation, but they have not been filed.

          Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

          by Mokurai on Wed Jul 09, 2014 at 09:20:01 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  That's also true for Ohio (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Phoenix Woman, Ahianne

            and I think the cases in ND, SD, and NE are also recognition-only ones (this routes around some bad precedent in the 8th Circuit where back in 2006 bans on celebration (issuance of licenses) were ruled constitutional; there's currently no precedent on recognition. The other two states with bans in the 8th, AR and MO, have only state cases).

            Also, the Louisiana case started out as a recognition-only case, but during oral arguments the judge indicated that he would not rule separately on recognition and celebration and effectively ordered the plaintiffs to find an intervenor challenging the celebration ban.

            Unfortunately when smart and educated people get crazy ideas they can come up with plausibly truthy arguments. -- Andrew F Cockburn

            by ebohlman on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 12:03:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  As in Louisiana, so elsewhere (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              Challenging recognition bans is the wedge in the crack of celebration bans.  

              And here is where we see a major drawback in the sort of cookie-cutter legislation pushed by ALEC and other corporate conservative law factories:   The anti-equality laws are all so similar that they all share the same legal weaknesses, which means that as the precedents for equality get stronger across the nation, the easier it is for persons in other states to overturn their states' anti-equality legislation in court.

              Visit for Minnesota news as it happens.

              by Phoenix Woman on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 05:20:53 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Where have you been getting your information? (0+ / 0-)

              I use three sites for information on Marriage Equality lawsuits, Freedom to Marry, Equality on Trial, and Marriage Equality USA. Each has details and sometimes whole cases that the others miss. Things are moving rather rapidly these days.

              Ohio Two successful recognition cases, with decisions stayed as usual, followed by Gibson v. Himes asking for full equality in state court, filed on April 30.

              North Dakota Ramsay v. Dalrymple for full equality, filed on June 6 in Federal court and Diaried here. A previous case on recognition, Jorgensen v. Montplaisir.

              South Dakota Rosenbrahn v. Daugaard for full equality, filed May 22 in Federal court and Diaried here.

              You are right about Nebraska. Marriage Equality USA reports cases on foster parents, recognition, and divorce.

              My Diaries on ND and SD cases, republished by Kossacks for Marriage Equality:

              Breaking: Marriage Equality Suit in South Dakota (updated)

              ND Marriage Equality Suit Followup, when the case was filed. As it says, it is a followup, in this case to my Diary when this case was being put together.

              There have been other Diaries on these cases.

              Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

              by Mokurai on Thu Jul 10, 2014 at 10:24:16 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site