Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Report: GOP appeals DOMA case to the Supreme Court
politico44 ^ | 6/29/12 | DONOVAN SLACK

Posted on 06/30/2012 12:18:50 PM PDT by ColdOne

The Washington Blade's Chris Johnson reports:

House Speaker John Boehner's (R-Ohio) attorneys on Friday formally appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court an appeals court decision determining the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional, according to a Democratic aide.

Drew Hammill, spokesperson for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), told the Washington Blade on Friday afternoon that House Republicans had notified Democratic leadership counsel filed an appeal to the Supreme Court.

(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: blag; boehner; clement; doma; gaymarriage; holder; homosexualagenda; kenyanbornmuzzie; marriage; paulclement; romney; romneyvsclerks; swrdswllwngsdshw
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

1 posted on 06/30/2012 12:18:55 PM PDT by ColdOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

What Supreme Court? We don’t have one of those anymore.


2 posted on 06/30/2012 12:20:17 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Dude! Where's my Constitution?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

And once again, they’re going to trust THIS Supreme Court to do the right thing and overturn that appeals court? Yeah, right!


3 posted on 06/30/2012 12:21:23 PM PDT by Sister_T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Marriage is just another form of taxation.


4 posted on 06/30/2012 12:22:52 PM PDT by oldbrowser (Blue state sickness must not be rewarded)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

This could get VERY interesting now.

When would this case likely be heard if accepted?


5 posted on 06/30/2012 12:23:38 PM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
Marriage? Going, going, GONE!

Well, except for gays, whose weddings will henceforth be taxpayer-funded.

6 posted on 06/30/2012 12:23:38 PM PDT by madprof98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

“I feel like I’m taking crazy pills”

Zoolander


7 posted on 06/30/2012 12:24:22 PM PDT by reagandemocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Sadly you are correct.


8 posted on 06/30/2012 12:27:01 PM PDT by ColdOne (I miss my poochie... Tasha 2000~3/14/11 0bie don' t eat my dog!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

From the article:

“Boehner’s office confirmed the appeal to POLITICO but noted the action was technically taken by BLAG - the House’s Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group - and its lawyer, Paul Clement. Clement has been defending DOMA, which prohibits the federal government from recognizing gay marriage, since the Justice Department stopped defending it last year.”

I have oft been wondering HOW Obama can refuse his sworn duty to protect and enforce the law....and get away with it. DOMA IS law.


9 posted on 06/30/2012 12:27:36 PM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

L.

o.

L.


10 posted on 06/30/2012 12:29:27 PM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

This Supreme Court does what Barry and Holder tells it to do. They both have already stated that they are in the sack with the homosexuals. This is a waste of time.


11 posted on 06/30/2012 12:35:26 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Dude! Where's my Constitution?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
House Speaker John Boehner's (R-Ohio) attorneys on Friday formally appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court an appeals court decision determining the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional, according to a Democratic aide.

Now???

12 posted on 06/30/2012 12:36:20 PM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sister_T

Are you kidding? These are Romney’s people. They want to see DOMA done away with once and for all. What better way to see that happen than to give it to John Roberts’ court. Maybe he can even convince Justice Kennedy to join him this time and make it 6 to 3 for striking DOMA down.


13 posted on 06/30/2012 12:36:25 PM PDT by Waryone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

We’ll lose, at a minimum, Kennedy on this one. Roberts a maybe. Alito, Thomas and Scalia will side with DOMA


14 posted on 06/30/2012 12:36:33 PM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

This Supreme Court does what Barry and Holder tells(sic) it to do.

_________________

Please substantiate this with factual evidence.


15 posted on 06/30/2012 12:37:58 PM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
Guarenteed, this one fails to be overturned.

If the concept of coerced commerce made constitutional muster, this one is a gimmee.

16 posted on 06/30/2012 12:38:30 PM PDT by Lazamataz (People who resort to Godwin's Law are just like Hitler.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

Next year.


17 posted on 06/30/2012 12:38:30 PM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Oh really? Why bother? To cement another one of the commie’s goals?


18 posted on 06/30/2012 12:40:32 PM PDT by TribalPrincess2U (54,000,000 0bama's people on welfare and food stamps?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RIghtwardHo

Do you know approximately when next year? Do we have any idea of what the upcoming schedule looks like?


19 posted on 06/30/2012 12:41:11 PM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RIghtwardHo

Don’t be too sure. Roberts gave significant pro bono help to the parties challenging the constitutionality of Colorado’s Amendment 2, which barred municipalities from designating homosexuals as a protected class. Ultimately Amendment 2 was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court, in what was the most significant victory for the homosexual rights movement up to that time, making possible the much bigger homosexual victory of Lawrence v. Texas in 2003.
So, Roberts, of his own free will, helped the homosexual rights movement overturn a landmark anti-homosexual rights referendum that had been passed by the people of the state of Colorado; and he concealed this fact when asked about it by the U.S. Senate.


20 posted on 06/30/2012 12:44:16 PM PDT by TxAnn56
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

The laws against beastiality are just as “unconstitutional” as laws against homosexuality. Are we going to go there, or are people going to wake up and reign this pack of dictators in before then?


21 posted on 06/30/2012 12:49:02 PM PDT by American in Israel (A wise man's heart directs him to the right, but the foolish mans heart directs him toward the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer
How about appealing to the SCOTU--- Universal JudicialCare.


22 posted on 06/30/2012 12:49:53 PM PDT by tflabo (Truth or tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita
How many "victories" did the American people have with the decisions made by Barry's court last week? My count is ZERO. Barry and his 'RATS were the big winners. Nobody expected the court to change the language in ObamaCare in order for them to be able determine that it was "constitutional".

"...government of the people, by the people, for the people..." my ass.

23 posted on 06/30/2012 12:50:38 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Dude! Where's my Constitution?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: tflabo

already in session.


24 posted on 06/30/2012 12:50:58 PM PDT by TribalPrincess2U (54,000,000 0bama's people on welfare and food stamps?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: chris37

25 posted on 06/30/2012 12:51:33 PM PDT by Lazamataz (People who resort to Godwin's Law are just like Hitler.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
Realize what idiots this nation has become. All through the centuries of history marriage has been the union of male and female in holy matrimony as created by Holy God. Really no need for it to even be defined, its such very basic knowledge. Now the so-called enlightened, evolved, proregressives have twisted it up to fit their perverted views to change it up and alter it. A very unwise wicked scheme.

Forever, O LORD, Your word is settled in heaven.... Psalm 119:89

26 posted on 06/30/2012 1:00:16 PM PDT by tflabo (Truth or tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Oh my Dear Lord, Jesus!

I think I don’t even know what to say, Laz :S


27 posted on 06/30/2012 1:00:58 PM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Soooo....you have no factual evidence for the comment?


28 posted on 06/30/2012 1:07:52 PM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: chris37

Want to share this scripture that Pastor John W. Hill from voiceoffreedomtvministry.org shared with me yesterday concerning our govt leaders and judges.... interesting..

Micah Ch:7

3. That they may do evil with both hands earnestly, the prince asketh for gifts, and the judge asketh for a reward; and the great man, he uttereth his mischievous desire: so they wrap it up.

4. The best of them is as a brier: the most upright is sharper than a thorn hedge: the day of thy watchmen and thy visitation cometh; now shall be their perplexity.

Guess you can insert the modern day players in the above scripture.


29 posted on 06/30/2012 1:16:01 PM PDT by tflabo (Truth or tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer
How many "victories" did the American people have with the decisions made by Barry's court last week? My count is ZERO. Barry and his 'RATS were the big winners.

I have to disagree with you on that. I realize I am probably in the minority here, but I am beginning to appreciate more and more what Roberts has done. While I abhor judicial activism (and this is definitely a case of judicial activism), I am grateful that Roberts was able to pull Kennedy, Breyer and Kagan into the same camp with him, Alito, Thomas, and Scalia. Think about that. Seven out of nine Supreme Court Justices just ruled that Obamacare is not constitutional under the commerce clause and the necessary and proper clause.

Take note here, the Roberts court did NOT say that this ObamaTax was constitutional. In fact, they offered no opinion on its constitutionality, nor should they have since the tax has not yet taken effect.

Once it does, I can assure you that it will find its way back to the Supreme Court at which time Roberts will be first in line to rule against it. And best of all, a strong precedent has been established which substantially weakens the power of the commerce clause.

So for now, the ObamaTax reverts back to the political issue it should be. And the GOP gains of 2010 will be repeated in 2012 now that ObamaTax is back on the ballot.

30 posted on 06/30/2012 1:21:34 PM PDT by Hoodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser
Marriage is just another form of taxation.

Just wait until Taxmageddon strikes on 01 JAN 13. The marriage penalty tax comes back.

31 posted on 06/30/2012 1:21:54 PM PDT by Old Sarge (We are now officially over the precipice, we just havent struck the ground yet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

That’s a real live Doraville doll.


32 posted on 06/30/2012 1:24:26 PM PDT by Hoodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Hoodat

Nuh uh. I live near Doraville. I have never seen her.


33 posted on 06/30/2012 1:27:06 PM PDT by Lazamataz (People who resort to Godwin's Law are just like Hitler.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Hoodat
Take note here, the Roberts court did NOT say that this ObamaTax was constitutional.

IF this is the way it goes, and IF they correct their error, I will once again have hope for America.

But at this time, I Am a Man Without A Country.

34 posted on 06/30/2012 1:29:25 PM PDT by Lazamataz (People who resort to Godwin's Law are just like Hitler.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
Roberts has proven to be quite the penumbra spelunker...if “gay marriage” is hidden somewhere in the constitution, he's the man to find it.
35 posted on 06/30/2012 1:36:23 PM PDT by Tex-Con-Man (T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII 2012 - "Together, I Shall Ride You To Victory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hoodat

I agree with your perspective. ;-)

I also like this quote from your home page:

“Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one’s government is not necessarily to secure freedom.” -Friedrich von Hayek


36 posted on 06/30/2012 1:37:09 PM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Good luck with that.

Someone better come up with a lie in oral argument so Roberts can vote for it.


37 posted on 06/30/2012 1:37:57 PM PDT by Colonel_Flagg (Conservatism is not a matter of convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

Arizona v USA, NFIB v Sebellius, Florida v HHS


38 posted on 06/30/2012 1:49:36 PM PDT by Steelers6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

I saw one that could have been her sister stuffing herself at Paw-Paw’s on Buford Hwy back in the late 80s.


39 posted on 06/30/2012 2:07:41 PM PDT by Hoodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
IF this is the way it goes, and IF they correct their error, I will once again have hope for America.

That's what I'm hoping for, but if not, I'm moving to Uruguay.

btw, your tagline is hysterical!

40 posted on 06/30/2012 2:09:52 PM PDT by Hoodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Roberts will ensure that it becomes “right and proper taxation” to force people to become homosexuals...


41 posted on 06/30/2012 2:46:05 PM PDT by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita
When would this case likely be heard if accepted?

They were talking about October 2012 at the soonest, when the next court session begins. My realistic guess is that it will more likely be later in 2013.

42 posted on 06/30/2012 3:02:55 PM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Roberts is all ready a “gay rights” activist....any bets on how he’ll rule???

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/05/politics/politicsspecial1/05roberts.html?pagewanted=all

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2010-03-03/law_review/29985692_1_gay-couples-marriage-licenses-opponents-of-gay-marriage


43 posted on 06/30/2012 3:25:55 PM PDT by Kaosinla (The More the Plans Fail. The More the Planners Plan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hoodat

Take note here, the Roberts court did NOT say that this ObamaTax was constitutional
____________________________________________________________

Yes they absolutely did.


44 posted on 06/30/2012 4:03:30 PM PDT by free me (Roberts killed America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Why... so the 5 communist jurists can make the 4 Conservative jurists and themselves look like losers again?

LLS


45 posted on 06/30/2012 6:30:03 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Don't Tread On Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer
As long as roberts sits on the bench, his two illegal alien children will be at risk and he will do whatever he is told to do... either that or he is so incompetent as to be a legal imbecil.

LLS

46 posted on 06/30/2012 6:32:19 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Don't Tread On Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: free me
I beg to differ. They ruled that the power to tax was constitutional, but they issued no ruling on the application of this tax, nor can they until after the tax takes effect.

There is some ruling that was issued shortly after the War of Northern Aggression that set precedent that a tax cannot be challenged until after it takes effect. Besides, no argument was offered against ObamaTax as a tax. Once the tax takes effect, then and only then can it be challenged. And it will be. And Roberts will rule accordingly. Just on equal protection alone, ObamaTax will be tossed. You may not see it now, but a lot of good is going to come from this.

47 posted on 06/30/2012 8:32:41 PM PDT by Hoodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Hoodat

Again, you are completely wrong Hoodat.

Read the opinion yourself.

Roberts ruled that the “mandate” was allowed by the constitution because it was a tax, not a penalty.

If you had read the opinion or any intelligent analyses of the opinion you would already know that Roberts dealt with the question of “Once the tax takes effect, then and only then can it be challenged.” by declaring the mandate a “penalty”

He subsequently, in the same opinion, ruled it a tax.

If this sounds convoluted to you it’s only because it is.


48 posted on 06/30/2012 8:51:52 PM PDT by free me (Roberts killed America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Hoodat

Here is an article that may help explain this for you:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2900999/posts

Here he addresses the “anti-injuction act’ you referred to:

Roberts first examines the question of whether the Anti-Injunction Act prohibits Americans from bringing suit against Obamacare at this time.

“The Anti-Injunction Act provides that ‘no suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax shall be maintained in any court by any person, whether or not such person is the person against whom such tax was assessed,’” Roberts explains.

“Amicus contends that the Internal Revenue Code treats the penalty as a tax, and that the Anti-Injunction Act therefore bars this suit,” says Roberts.

“The text of the pertinent statutes suggests otherwise,” Roberts continues. “The Anti-Injunction Act applies to suits ‘for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax.’ Congress, however, chose to describe the ‘[s]hared responsibility payment’ imposed on those who forgo health insurance not as a ‘tax,’ but as a ‘penalty.’ There is no immediate reason to think that a statute applying to ‘any tax’ would apply to a ‘penalty.’

“Congress’s decision to label this exaction a ‘penalty’ rather than a ‘tax’ is significant because the Affordable Care Act describes many other exactions it creates as ‘taxes,’” said Roberts.

Roberts thus concludes that because Congress calls the penalty for not complying with the individual mandate a “penalty” not a “tax,” the “penalty” therefore is not a “tax.”


49 posted on 06/30/2012 9:02:08 PM PDT by free me (Roberts killed America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: free me

That’s just plain whack. Looks like it will be up to us then. Time to grab a pitchfork and visit my Congressman and Senators.


50 posted on 07/01/2012 1:43:27 PM PDT by Hoodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson