Free Republic

During oral arguments on Prop 8, Justice Kennedy alluded to the views of children of same-sex couples as if their desires and concerns are identical to and uncritical of their parents’ decisions. But the reality is far more complicated. During the oral arguments about Proposition 8, Justice Anthony Kennedy referred to children being raised by same-sex couples. Since I was one of those children—from ages 2-19, I was raised by a lesbian mother with the help of her partner—I was curious to see what he would say. (snip) I have heard of the supposed “consensus” on the soundness of same-sex...

April 1, 2013 (Newsbusters.org) – As thousands trekked across the country this week to protest at the Supreme Court while justices heard arguments on Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the media did the same by voicing their own opinions. From the networks to online news sites, so-called neutral journalists twisted coverage in support of gay marriage. CBS led the network pack and focused a one-sided light on Tuesday evening reports, the night of the first Supreme Court arguments. CBS went personal March 26 as reporter John Blackstone, during “Evening News,” highlighted a story of lesbian couple...

The death certificate read “single,” even though the fallen soldier was married. When it came time to inform the next of kin, casualty officers did not go to the widow’s door in North Carolina, nor did she receive the flag that draped the casket of her beloved, a 29-year-old National Guard member killed by a suicide bomber in Afghanistan. Because federal law defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman, the military did not recognize the relationship of Army Sgt. Donna R. Johnson and Tracy Dice Johnson at all, rendering Johnson ineligible for the most basic survivor...

Related: The Fold: For some justices, marriage doesn’t mean kids WASHINGTON — The cost to taxpayers for a House Republican decision to fund the legal team supporting the Defense of Marriage Act has climbed from $500,000 to as much as $3 million, Democrats say in questioning the GOP stance on the gay marriage issue now before the Supreme Court. “It’s really disappointing and unworthy of a subject that is going before the Supreme Court of our country,” House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said Wednesday, referring to Republicans spending that money without input from House Democrats. Pelosi made the comments after...

Dear readers, The present gay "marriage" debate is an important one, but I am more worried about the broader, encompassing matter at hand, namely the dark forces trying to redefine social institutions essential to a free society. The family is traditionally the private institution commanding the most intense loyalty from its members, along with churches (at least in happier times). Leftist theorists are now working to drill down past the family, extending their hands into the crib to rob us of our God-given individual identities as males and females and the important roles and responsibilities which have always accompanied these...

St. Patrick's Day has come and gone, and with it the annual debate over whether open participation by marchers associated with the LGBT (sorry if I forgot an initial there) movement should be allowed to appear. The epicenter of this year's conflict was Cincinnati, where the sponsors of the parade stood firm and refused to allow openly gay marchers to take part. This is evidently one of the few occasions in which the marchers were told flat-out that were not wanted due to sexual preference. The uproar over the rejection was marked with the standard arguments: while the parade may...

During oral arguments today at the Supreme Court, Justice Antonin Scalia and attorney Ted Olson had a pointed exchange over whether same-sex marriage is a fundamental right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Scalia's argument, which was advanced by Chief Justice John Roberts before him, was that when the institution of marriage developed historically, it was not done with the explicit intent of excluding gay and lesbian couples. "We don't prescribe law for the future," Scalia said. "We decide what the law is. I'm curious, when did it become unconstitutional to exclude homosexual couples from marriage? 1791? 1868? When the Fourteenth...

There is no question that the media, political, and cultural push for gay marriage has made impressive gains. As recently as 1989, voters in avant-garde San Francisco repealed a law that had established only domestic partnerships. But judging by the questions posed by Supreme Court justices this week in oral arguments for two gay-marriage cases, most observers do not expect sweeping rulings that would settle the issue and avoid protracted political combat. A total of 41 states currently do not allow gay marriage, and most of those laws are likely to remain in place for some time. Even should the...

Few things were certain after the Supreme Court's first foray into the issue of gay marriage earlier this week—except that conservative-leaning swing vote Justice Anthony Kennedy will control the outcome. The four liberal and the four conservative justices appeared to split right down the middle on how (and whether) to decide the constitutionality of both Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act. Kennedy—who in the past authored the court's two most important opinions affirming gay rights—seemed to be on the fence in both cases.

When Edith Windsor got engaged in the 1960s to the woman who eventually became her wife, she asked for a pin instead of a ring. A ring would have meant awkward questions, she said: Who is he? Where is he? And when do we meet him? … Windsor said the spirit of her partner of 44 years was watching and listening Wednesday, and she called marriage a “magic word.” “For anybody who doesn’t understand why we want it and why we need it, OK, it is magic,” she told reporters. Windsor is asking the court to strike down Section 3...

Seriously: of all editorial writers at the nation's major newspapers, could the Washington Post's Jonathan Capehart be the least conversant with the Constitution? Back in August, we caught Capehart admitting to his unfamiliarity with Enumerated Powers Clause. On today's Morning Joe, Capehart's Constitutional confusion was on display again. Discussing the Supreme Court's possible overturning of DOMA, Capehart complained that it looked like the Court was headed toward doing so not in reliance on equal protection, but on the basis of states' rights, which Capehart called "a legal technicality." Tenth Amendment much, Mr. Capehart? View the video here.

During oral arguments on Wednesday at the U.S. Supreme Court on a case testing the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, Justice Samuel Alito suggested that Congress could have used a more “neutral” term than marriage in the law the defines marriage as a union of one man and one woman for federal purposes. “Congress could have achieved exactly what it achieved under Section 3 by excising the term ‘married’ from the United States Code and replacing it with something more neutral,” Alito said. “It could have said ‘certified domestic units,’ and then defined this in exactly the way...

Marriage Decline: The disintegration of the nuclear family — particularly in the African-American community — and the rise in fatherless homes have greater societal implications than gay marriage, yet few pay attention. The debate over gay marriage has taken center stage with two cases, one involving California's Proposition 8 which bans it, and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which bars federal agencies recognizing the validity of same-sex marriages in the states where they are legal, now before the U.S. Supreme Court. We have argued that the civil purpose of marriage is not and never has been to reaffirm the...

On CNN, analyst Jeffrey Toobin predicts that "DOMA's in trouble": was repeatedly concerned that the Defense of Marriage Act violates state's rights." Toobin then got hit in the head by a falling umbrella.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor was questioning former U.S. Solicitor General Ted Olson, a pro-gay marriage Republican. She brought up a very interesting question during the exchange: If gay marriage is legal, what about polygamy? Sotomayor asked, "If you say that marriage is a fundamental right, what state restrictions could ever exist?" before referencing "polygamy and incest among adults," as reported by Matt Canham of the Salt Lake Tribune. The argument is an illustration of a broader issue about the culture of American society. To agree that gay marriage is indeed protected by the "equal protection" clause in the Constitution, wouldn't the...

A rare instance in which the left is decidedly pro-federalism. The word from Reuters and SCOTUSblog: U.S. Supreme Court justices signal interest in striking down #DOMA as violating states’ rights #breaking— Reuters Top News (@Reuters) March 27, 2013 Final update: #scotus 80% likely to strike down #doma. J Kennedy suggests it violates states’ rights; 4 other Justices see as gay rights.— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) March 27, 2013 A bit more detail from the WSJ liveblog: Justice Kennedy, however, jumped in with federalism concerns, questioning whether the federal government was intruding on the states’ territory. With there being so many different federal...

WASHINGTON — A majority of the justices on Wednesday questioned the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, as the Supreme Court took up the volatile issue of same-sex marriage for a second day. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, widely considered the swing vote on the divided court, joined the four liberals in posing skeptical questions to a lawyer defending the law, which defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman for the purposes of more than 1,000 federal laws and programs. “The question is whether or not the federal government under a federalism system has...

The Supreme Court's conservative justices on Wednesday were sharply critical of President Obama's approach to a federal law on same-sex marriage. Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder decided in 2011 that the federal Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional. They quit defending it in the courts, but directed federal agencies to continue to comply with the law. Conservatives on the Supreme Court criticized that approach Wednesday during oral arguments over whether DOMA is constitutional. “I don't see why he doesn't have the courage of his convictions,” Chief Justice John Roberts said of Obama's decision to continue following the law, even...

If the Supreme Court can find its way through a dense procedural thicket, and confront the constitutionality of the federal law that defined marriage as limited to a man and a woman, that law may be gone, after a seventeen-year existence. That was the overriding impression after just under two hours of argument Wednesday on the fate of the Defense of Marriage Act.

Supreme Court Decides Whether Of Not To Review Challenge Of California's Prop 8. This week the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on same California’s Prop 8 and a section of the Defense of Marriage Act which deals with benefits for same sex couples. Same sex marriage is front and center once again and I’ve heard some interesting arguments on how supporting government involvement in defining marriage is a “conservative” ideal. During the Sunday morning talk show circuit, former Bush communications adviser took the moderate position emerging within the GOP against American Values’ Gary Bauer. Nicole Wallace tried to argue...

GRAND RAPIDS, MI — U.S. Rep. Justin Amash wants the Supreme Court to throw out the federal definition of marriage altogether, a revelation made the night before justices were set to weigh one of two gay marriage cases this week. Amash, R-Cascade Township, was pressed for his take on the federal Defense of Marriage Act during an American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan forum Monday in Grand Rapids. "My view has always been that government should not be in the business of defining or redefining marriage," Amash said. "I see it as a private issue. I personally see it as...

.... Over the next two days, the justices will consider two of the weightiest civil rights cases in years, both about the continuing struggle of gay men and lesbians to obtain equal recognition under the law. On Tuesday, the court will consider the constitutionality of Proposition 8, .... On Wednesday, the justices will turn to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a law enacted in 1996 that bars the federal government from offering benefits to same-sex couples, even if they were legally married in their home state. The justices have many options as they consider how to rule. But more...

3/25/13 - On Monday, a debate on CNN over the issues headed to the Supreme Court this week relating to the constitutionality of prohibitions on same-sex marriage and the right of same-sex couples to receive the same federal benefits as straight couples exploded. Heritage Foundation scholar Ryan Anderson got into a heated and tense exchange with CNN anchor Don Lemon after he asserted that there are no laws currently on the books that make gay marriage "illegal." Lemon resented Anderson's assertion, calling it "absurd." "Just to clarify, the issue here is not legality," Anderson began, "so, in all 50 states,...

On Tuesday, March 26, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on whether gay couples have a constitutional right to marry. But major American corporations have already heard the arguments—and in their own way, decided it's OK. Beginning in 2002, a leading gay-rights group, the Human Rights Campaign, began systematically rating corporate America's commitment to gay rights. The effort was born in large part out of frustration with the political process.

Now that Senate Democrats have passed their first budget in four years, Washington is turning its attention away from fiscal issues this week and towards social ones. President Obama devoted his weekly radio and internet address Saturday to pushing for more gun control in response to the mass killing in Newton, Connecticut last year. “As a nation, the last three months have changed us,” Obama said. “You – the American people – have spoken. You’ve made it clear that it’s time to do something.” Specifically, Obama called for more background checks and an assault weapon ban. Aides told the Associated...

Hyping "growing support" for same-sex marriage, CNN's Carol Costello asked a supporter of California's Proposition 8 on Monday if he was "on the wrong side of history" for legally defining marriage as between one man and one woman. Her tone fits right with Friday's CNN panel where a traditional marriage supporter was disgustingly marginalized as a segregationist and compared to a slave owner. Costello cited GOP strategist Karl Rove admitting that he could see a Republican presidential candidate publicly support same-sex marriage in 2016. She then asked Austin Nimocks of the Alliance Defense Fund, "Austin, you heard what Karl Rove...

Dr. George Will is a respected social scientist and acclaimed writer, but he’s not a lawyer. And he shows it by suggesting the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional as the Supreme Court prepares to hear a challenge to that federal statute this week in U.S. v. Windsor. DOMA prevents the federal government from giving federal marital benefits to gay marriages or polygamous marriages, and the Constitution allows Congress to make that judgment. Will has made valuable contributions to the issue of gay marriage. And on a personal note, I’m grateful for Will’s very positive Washington Post column last...

“[U]nder the Constitution, the regulation and control of marital and family relationships are reserved to the States.” — U.S. Supreme Court, Sherrer v. Sherrer (1948) The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is an exception to the rule that a law’s title is as uninformative about the law’s purpose as the titles of Marx Brothers movies (“Duck Soup,” “Horse Feathers,” “Animal Crackers”) are about those movies’ contents. DOMA’s purpose is precisely what its title says. Which is why many conservatives and liberals should be uneasy Wednesday when the Supreme Court hears arguments about its constitutionality. Conservatives who supported DOMA should, after...

Next week, the Supreme Court will begin its consideration of two cases, one concerning the Defense of Marriage Act and the other California’s Proposition 8 Amendment, which may settle in the near-term the questions concerning the constitutionality of same-sex marriage. Both the Marriage Act and Proposition 8 define marriage as being between a man and a woman. The litigants, along with the Obama administration, claim that this definition denies a fundamental human right to homosexual couples. In order for this claim to be true, a marital union would have to be just as legitimately based upon a sodomitical act, as...

Given his track record on marital fidelity, former President Bill Clinton is not the person I would consult about "committed, loving relationships." Clinton used those words in a Washington Post op-ed last week, urging the Supreme Court to overturn the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman, which he signed into law. In his column, Clinton said that 1996 "was a very different time." No state recognized same-sex marriage and supporters of DOMA "believed that its passage 'would diffuse a movement to enact a constitutional amendment banning gay...

Dear Mr. Clinton, with all respect to the office of the president which you held for 8 years, I must say that it is not just ironic that you are now asking the Supreme Court to overturn the legislation you signed into law 17 years ago. It is downright tragic. In your March 7th editorial for the Washington Post, you wrote that although it “was only 17 years ago” when you signed the Defense of Marriage Act, “it was a very different time.” May I ask you, sir, if 17 years have changed the nature of men and women, of...

"In 1996, I signed the Defense of Marriage Act," says former President Bill Clinton in The Washington Post. DOMA, which prevents federal recognition of same-sex marriage, is up for review at the Supreme Court on April 27, and the justices will have to decide whether the law "is consistent with the principles of a nation that honors freedom, equality, and justice above all," Clinton says. In the 17 years since he signed it, the former president says, "I have come to believe that DOMA is contrary to those principles and, in fact, incompatible with our Constitution." (He's not alone: Read...

Times were different in 1996 when he signed the Defense of Marriage Act into law, former President Bill Clinton writes in today's Washington Post. "In no state in the union was same-sex marriage recognized, much less available as a legal right, but some were moving in that direction," Clinton says. Supporters of the act that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman, thought its passage would head off a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. But now, Clinton says, he believes DOMA is "incompatible with our Constitution." As the Supreme Court prepares to take up the act's constitutionality,...

Former President Bill Clinton, who in 1996 signed into law an act defining marriage as between a man and woman, said on Thursday the measure was unconstitutional and should be overturned by the Supreme Court. … Noting that the Supreme Court will hear arguments on March 27 challenging the constitutionality of DOMA, Clinton wrote the justices “must decide whether it is consistent with the principles of a nation that honors freedom, equality and justice above all, and is therefore constitutional. As the president who signed the act into law, I have come to believe that DOMA is contrary to those...

<p>One of the nation's leading gay-rights advocacy groups, the Human Rights Campaign, has formed a coalition of major companies calling for the repeal of the federal Defense of Marriage Act.</p> <p>It's no surprise, of course, that the HRC in Washington would use its considerable clout to organize big businesses to fight DOMA, the law that excludes recognition of same-sex marriages.</p>

On Monday, during his second inaugural address, President Barack Obama took time to parallel the gay rights movement with the Civil Rights movement. At the core of this civil rights argument is the need for same-sex marriage equality, according to the Associated Press. “Never before Monday had an inaugural address conveyed support for marriage equality, and activists now hope the Obama administration will take concrete steps to follow up, including escalated engagement in pending Supreme Court cases,” reports the AP on January 23. The Supreme Court is expected to hear oral arguments regarding the Defense of Marriage Act and California’s...

Chuck Hagel's Record On Gay Rights 1996: ... says he would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act 1999: ... opposes repealing the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy 2005: ... Hagel calls on the [Nebraska] court to reverse its decidsion, complaining the court had overridden Nebraska voters who opposed gay marriage Chuck Hagel's Apology: Too Little, Too Late Log Cabin Republicans ...

The current conundrum regarding the legalization of same-sex marriage is what happens when church and state are mixed -- the topics become confusing and confused. When I married my husband almost 15 years ago, I did so out of love and out of a desire to witness before God my commitment to him and his to me. The legal and tax ramifications did not enter into my head. But for couples of the same sex, the legal and tax ramifications can be very important because their legal rights differ from those of heterosexual couples in a number of ways, from...

WASHINGTON — For more than two decades, the defining battles within the Supreme Court over social and moral controversies have been fought between two devout Catholics appointed by President Reagan. Justice Antonin Scalia believes the law can and should enforce moral standards, including criminal bans on abortion and on "homosexual conduct" that many "believe to be immoral and destructive." Justice Anthony M. Kennedy is a libertarian conservative who believes the Constitution protects the freedom of individuals to "make personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing and education." Now the ideological fight between the conservative giants is...

This is it – the Supreme Court marriage moment that the ACLU has been working towards for years. The Court announced today that it has granted review of the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act in Edie Windsor’s case. The Court also took review of California’s Prop 8, so the full range of marriage issues will now be before the high court.  These cases are poised not just to take down DOMA and Prop 8, but to be the next building blocks for LGBT equality more broadly. The Windsor and Perry rulings, expected in June 2013, will be a...

<p>The first same-sex marriage at West Point’s Cadet Chapel will be celebrated Saturday – when a military veteran and her partner exchange vows roughly one year after President Obama ended the military policy banning openly gay people from serving in the military.</p>

A San Francisco couple is waiting to find out if the U.S. Supreme Court will take their case challenging the 1996 law that prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages. Karen Golinski and Amy Cunninghis got married during the brief window in 2008 when gay and lesbian couples could tie the knot in California. Golinski immediately tried to add her wife to her employer-sponsored health care plan. But because she is married to another woman and works for the U.S. government, her otherwise routine request was denied...

S. 598: Respect for Marriage Act of 2011 112th Congress, 2011–2012 A bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and ensure respect for State regulation of marriage. Sponsor: Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D-CA]

THE PRESIDENT’S RELIGION SHOULD THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES USE HIS POSITION AS COMMANDER-IN- CHIEF TO FORCE HIS PERSONAL MORAL VIEWS ON ALL MILITARY PERSONNEL? Historically Americans have expressed legitimate concerns that a President might use his office to promote his personal religious beliefs. From President John Kennedy in 1960, a Catholic, to 2008 Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, a Mormon, candidates and presidents have been required to express a commitment not to use the office of the President and Commander-In-Chief to promote their personal moral beliefs. If President John Kennedy had tried to label anyone who rejected his...

We have some breaking news out of New York: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled on Windsor v. the United States, a case challenging Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, and found a federal definition of marriage as one man and one woman violates the U.S. Constitution. "[W]e conclude that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act violates equal protection and is therefore unconstitutional," they wrote. Our legal eagle Ari Ezra Waldman will have a full analysis soon.

What would you do to raise $3 million to protect marriage from Barack Obama and his wealthy homosexual lobbyists? A gracious pro-marriage supporter has just created an extremely generous matching grant fund to help the National Organization for Marriage demonstrate your commitment to marriage as the unique union of one man and one woman. Here's how it works: If you donate right now, your contribution to protect marriage from Obama and his homosexual lobbyists will be tripled -- that's right, NOM will receive an additional $2 for every $1 you contribute right now!

Our Founding Fathers spoke much about the importance of “freedom of conscience” and its underpinning of all other freedoms. In 1803, Thomas Jefferson said, “We are bound, you, I, and every one to make common cause even with error itself, to maintain the common right of freedom of conscience.” Recent decisions by the Obama administration and Pentagon leaders threaten this common right, and their assault on freedom of conscience raises new and serious concerns — especially for our servicemen and women. Our armed services were created with an apolitical framework, and this unique platform has helped maintain Americans’ trust and...

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Wednesday that she believes the Defense of Marriage Act will likely go to the U.S. Supreme Court within the next year. Ginsburg spoke at the University of Colorado in Boulder. She was asked a student-submitted question about the equal-protection clause and whether the nation's high court would consider it applying to sexual orientation...

September 12, 2012|6:13 pmThe U.S. Department of Justice filed two petitions Tuesday as part of their challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act, asking the Supreme Court to review cases that could ultimately lead to the court overturning the law that defines marriage as between and man and a woman. The specific part of the law that attorneys for the Justice Department want the court to focus on is Section 3, which they say violate the rights of legally married same-sex couples, arguing that it treats them differently than married heterosexual couples.In 2007, New York resident Edie Windsor married her...

Vermont's attorney general says the state is the latest (after NY and CT) to ask an appeals court to rule that the federal law defining marriage as between a man and a woman is unconstitutional. ...