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

Skip to comments.

Justices signal they may not take Prop. 8 case
Orange County Register (AP) ^ | March 26, 2013 | MARK SHERMAN

Posted on 03/26/2013 10:38:49 AM PDT by South40

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last

1 posted on 03/26/2013 10:38:49 AM PDT by South40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: South40

They always try to duck ruling on the tough cases.


2 posted on 03/26/2013 10:41:32 AM PDT by white trash redneck (Just one of B. Hussein Obama's "typical white people")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: white trash redneck

They could roll this one all the way back ~ simply state it’s a state matter. Frankly the Supreme Court has wasted entirely too much time focusing on pudenda.


3 posted on 03/26/2013 10:44:13 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: white trash redneck
Not always. The fact that Obamacare is the law of the land is proof of that.

Given that the chief justice has proved himself to be a liberal this country would be better off if the court were to skip this one.

4 posted on 03/26/2013 10:45:45 AM PDT by South40 (I Love The "New & Improved" Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: South40
Such an outcome would almost certainly allow gay marriages to resume in California but would have no impact elsewhere.

Actually, such a ruling would also vacate the 9th Circuit decision. If the SCOTUS doesn't have jurisdiction, then neither did the 9th Circuit.

5 posted on 03/26/2013 10:46:02 AM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

If they take the case, all Obama has to do is look sternly at Roberts, and he’ll change sides.


6 posted on 03/26/2013 10:46:37 AM PDT by brownsfan (Behold, the power of government cheese.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan
Such an outcome would almost certainly allow gay marriages to resume in California

There is no such thing as gay "marriage". It's more a bunch of gays pretending they have altered the meaning of the word.

7 posted on 03/26/2013 10:47:26 AM PDT by South40 (I Love The "New & Improved" Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: South40

so in other words they’re attempting to let the repeal of Prop 8 stand without getting their fingerprints on it. Cowards, the entire lot of them.


8 posted on 03/26/2013 10:48:24 AM PDT by SCHROLL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

I think we should devise a method for gays to PROVE they’re gay: if any of them ever got some with the opposite sex, then they disqualify as gay, now they’re just ‘experimenting’.

Should winnow their numbers quite a bit.


9 posted on 03/26/2013 10:48:41 AM PDT by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: brownsfan
If they take the case, all Obama has to do is look sternly at Roberts, and he’ll change sides.

He already changed sides and to my knowledge he has never come back. The chances of this going the direction of sanity are slim given that his lesbian cousin will be in the courtroom.

10 posted on 03/26/2013 10:49:32 AM PDT by South40 (I Love The "New & Improved" Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: white trash redneck

Why is this a tough case? Seems to me there is nothing in the US Constitution that says anything about marriage at all. This is a state issue. The ninth circuit should have returned the issue the the people of CA.


11 posted on 03/26/2013 10:50:19 AM PDT by mosaicwolf (Strength and Honor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: white trash redneck

They didn’t duck Obamacare or abortion. Why start now?


12 posted on 03/26/2013 10:51:26 AM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: South40

If SCOTUS doesn’t hear the case I suspect it means they believe the public needs more conditioning before they will peacefully accept a pro-Gay decision.


13 posted on 03/26/2013 10:52:24 AM PDT by Iron Munro (Welcome to Obama-Land - EVERYTHING NOT FORBIDDEN IS COMPULSORY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

Then why did they take the case in the first place? They took the case, had attorneys for both sides (and countles amici) present brief, scheduled a hearing .. and NOW they suggest they may not make a decision on this case?

They could have just refused to take the case when it was initially brought to the Court.


14 posted on 03/26/2013 10:53:56 AM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40
He already changed sides and to my knowledge he has never come back. The chances of this going the direction of sanity are slim given that his lesbian cousin will be in the courtroom.

Mr. Soros sent her there to make sure he behaves himself.

15 posted on 03/26/2013 10:54:01 AM PDT by COBOL2Java (Fighting Obama without Boehner & McConnell is like going deer hunting without your accordion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: brownsfan

You are assuming he is on the conservative side to begin with. I think that them stating there is no legal standing to take the case would be the best outcome we could hope for... even if it means CA gets gay marriage. They can have it.

This would be a huge loss for the LGBT, their strategy all along has been to push this to the federal level and force the judicial branch to declare gay marriage a right throughout the land. If this approach fails watch for a military member( ie federal employee ) to sue up to the feds for denial of benefits in state X when they were legally married in state Y. This is not over by a long shot.


16 posted on 03/26/2013 10:55:09 AM PDT by longfellowsmuse (last of the living nomads)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: longfellowsmuse

Rust - and evil - never sleeps.


17 posted on 03/26/2013 10:58:26 AM PDT by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: South40

You can hear/read this morning’s argument here:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_audio_detail.aspx?argument=12-144


18 posted on 03/26/2013 11:01:56 AM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

Seems to me it will be tough for them to say the Prop 8 supporters don’t have standing, when the California Supreme Court said they do in a unanimous ruling. In the past, the US Supreme Court has deferred to the state to determine standing in a case like this - and the California Supreme Court gave a detailed discussion of that in their ruling.


19 posted on 03/26/2013 11:11:27 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (America is becoming California, and California is becoming Detroit. Detroit is already hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EDINVA

Thanks or the link!


20 posted on 03/26/2013 11:13:22 AM PDT by South40 (I Love The "New & Improved" Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 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