You must Publish this diary to make this visible to the public,
or click 'Edit Diary' to make further changes first.
Posting a Diary Entry
Daily Kos welcomes blog articles from readers, known as diaries. The Intro section to a diary should be about three paragraphs long, and is required. The body section is optional, as
is the poll, which can have 1 to 15 choices. Descriptive tags are also required to help others find your diary by subject; please don't use "cute" tags.
When you're ready, scroll down below the tags and click Save & Preview. You can edit your diary after it's published by clicking Edit Diary. Polls cannot be edited once they are published.
If this is your first time creating a Diary since the Ajax upgrade, before you enter any text below, please press Ctrl-F5 and then hold down the Shift Key and press your browser's Reload button to refresh its cache with the new script files.
ATTENTION: READ THE RULES.
One diary daily maximum.
Substantive diaries only. If you don't have at least three solid, original paragraphs, you should probably post a comment in an Open Thread.
No repetitive diaries. Take a moment to ensure your topic hasn't been blogged (you can search for Stories and Diaries
that already cover this topic), though fresh original analysis is always welcome.
Use the "Body" textbox if your diary entry is longer than three paragraphs.
Any images in your posts must be hosted by an approved image hosting service (one of: imageshack.us, photobucket.com, flickr.com, smugmug.com, allyoucanupload.com, picturetrail.com, mac.com, webshots.com, editgrid.com).
Copying and pasting entire copyrighted works is prohibited. If you do quote something, keep it brief, always provide a link to the original source, and use the <blockquote> tags to clearly identify the quoted material. Violating this rule is grounds for immediate banning.
Be civil. Do not "call out" other users by name in diary titles. Do not use profanity in diary titles. Don't write diaries whose main purpose is to deliberately inflame.
By “clean sweep for gay marriage” I mean that there is, IMHO, a strong likelihood that both state and federal laws against gay marriage may be invalidated entirely by the Supreme Court, and perhaps for reasons which may not ever be addressed in oral arguments or appear in the final opinion. Follow my arguments:
1) The two cases are a near perfect setup for the court to decide the issue once and for all time at both the State and Federal level since the two cases involve both state and federal law. Combining both state and federal cases does not appear to be a random choice by the court. This is a setup to wipe marriage discrimination off the books.
2) Public opinion on gay marriage is neither as divided nor as static as opinions were on abortion. This thing is moving fast and in one direction: favorable. So I don't think Ginzberg will oppose us.
3) Because of the speed with which public opinion is moving, it is quite likely that the issue is going to have to be addressed AGAIN by the Supreme Court in very short order, perhaps as little as two years. On that occasion, the pro-gay marriage side will unquestionably use arguments supplied by the final opinion used in the current case. That puts the Court in an embarrassing position: reversing itself after only two to four years. And in the process, accepting arguments it just provided but used for a different conclusion (a limited but positive opinion). I promise you the justices do not want another Plessy, nor another Hardwick/Lawrence debacle. And after Bush v Gore, the Court wants its stature back.
4) The Court may just follow the Constitution’s bars against discrimination, punishment without due process, and violation of privacy. I know it sounds ludicrous for this court to rely on the Constitution, but stranger things have happened.
5) This issue was once gold for Republicans, but is not now, nor will it be in the future. It is a detriment for Republicans. Besides, it appeals to the Libertarian crowd in the GOP. Republicans will benefit if this issue is taken completely off the table by the Supreme Court.
6) Of course, all of this flies completely in the face of the Mainstream Media’s Conventional Wisdom, which is, as we know, nearly always wrong. Cheers.