Free Republic

Chief Justice Roberts has long been troubled by the idea that courts might short-circuit a democratic debate over marriage equality by imposing a constitutional right to marry by judicial fiat. In his dissent from the Windsor case in 2013, he wrote that he was reluctant to “tar the political branches with the brush of bigotry” without convincing evidence that a law’s “principal purpose was to codify malice.” He might vote to uphold same-sex-marriage bans on the grounds that the people, not judges, should decide the future of marriage.

What starts as a “rights” issue inevitably ends up enforced at the barrel of the gun, and this highlights the importance of correctly defining words, especially before the Supreme Court. In the end, our society has to get along on these issues and come to some agreement—even if it’s to agree to disagree.  But society’s disagreements eventually work themselves out in law, and the Left’s aversion to even the most basic exploration of how changes in law affect our citizens is most troubling. The Left would have us change human taxonomy the way Facebook has changed its gender policy. Instead of...

When police spotted Freddie Gray and he took off running through his Baltimore neighborhood, officers made a split-second decision to give chase, setting in motion his death in custody and rioting in the streets. Fleeing from police is not, by itself, illegal in America, and the U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that in safe neighborhoods, people not suspected of criminal activity can ignore a police officer who approaches them, even to the point of walking away. But courts have set a different standard for places where street crime is common, ruling that police can chase, stop and frisk people...

Full title: “It is Going to Be an Issue” — Supreme Court Argument on Same-Sex Marriage Puts Religious Liberty in the Crosshairs It is … it is going to be an issue.” With those words, spoken yesterday before the Supreme Court of the Unites States, the Solicitor General of the United States announced that religious liberty is directly threatened by the legalization of same-sex marriage. Donald Verrili, representing the Obama Administration as the nation’s highest court considered again the issue of same-sex marriage, was responding to a question from Justice Samuel Alito. His answer confirms with candor the threat we...

Many people think that the resistance to redefining marriage stems from a desire to be unfair to homosexuals. It doesn’t. Resistance mainly comes from the knowledge that when the State redefines marriage then this harms the ability of heterosexuals to get married and stay married. And if redefinition harms the ability of heterosexuals to get married and stay married then children suffer. And if children suffer then society finds itself facing more social problems and financial debt. The USA declines.

Without comment, the United States Supreme Court has ordered a federal appeals court to reconsider its ruling that the Michigan Catholic Conference and other Catholic entities fall under the purview of the HHS mandate. Plaintiffs in the case include the Michigan Catholic Conference, Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Kalamazoo, the Catholic Diocese of Nashville, Catholic Charities of Tennessee, Camp Marymount, Inc., Mary, Queen Of Angels, Inc., St. Mary Villa, Inc., the Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia Congregation (popularly known as the Nashville Dominicans), and Aquinas College in Tennessee.

As the Supreme Court's oral arguments on whether states should be constitutionally obligated to issue same-sex marriage licenses adjourned Tuesday afternoon, Heritage Foundation's Ryan Anderson said in a news conference outside the building that the likely swing vote justice, Anthony Kennedy, was "not persuaded" by LGBT arguments. As many are predicting the Supreme Court's decision in June to come down to a narrow 5-4 vote, Justice Kennedy has been pegged again as the justice who is likely to decide which way the court leans in making the tough decision on whether the 14th Amendment requires states to uphold same-sex marriages...

By his own logic, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy should lead the court’s majority in upholding individual states’ laws against same-sex marriage. In the four conjoined cases on the subject set for oral argument April 28, the high court is asked not whether same-sex marriage is good policy. It is instead asked if such marriage is a national, constitutionally protected right, one so fundamentally interwoven in our nation’s fabric of protections that no state law can refuse to recognize it. Kennedy’s most recent decision regarding marriage, the 2013 case of U.S. v. Windsor, contained two notions seemingly in tension with...

Our friend Quin Hillyer posted an interesting article in National Review in which he parsed at some length the past opinions of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, the perceived “swing vote” on the same-sex ‘marriage’ case argued before the Court yesterday. Many conservatives have been pessimistic about the prospects of the preservation of federalism and the power of states to regulate marriage, and Hillyer acknowledges Kennedy’s paeans to “personhood and dignity,” and “reviewing his long history of rulings that consistently expanded the rights of homosexuals at every opportunity, many observers consider it a foregone conclusion that his decision in the...

The gay rights movement has spent years trying to convince judges across the country that prohibiting same-sex marriage discriminates against gays and lesbians solely because of their sexual orientation. But on Tuesday, a surprising question from Chief Justice John Roberts revived a very different legal strategy that the gay rights movement had all but abandoned.

As the Supreme Court heard opening arguments on gay marriage Tuesday, one anti-gay marriage protester disrupted the calm of the courtroom and issued an afterlife warning for those who support same-sex unions. “If you support gay marriage, you will burn in hell!” the protester screamed before he was detained by police and escorted out of the building, CNN reports. But that didn’t stop the man from continuing to shout his views about homosexuality and damnation as he was dragged out of the Supreme Court. …

WASHINGTON (April 28, 2015) — Excerpts from arguments before the Supreme Court on Tuesday about whether states must allow same-sex couples to marry and whether states must recognize gay marriages performed in other states:Chief Justice John Roberts, on the institution of marriage: "You're not seeking to join the institution, you're seeking to change what the institution is. The fundamental core of the institution is the opposite-sex relationship and you want to introduce into it a same-sex relationship."

WASHINGTON – The most dramatic moment in a historic case before the U.S. Supreme Court on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage Tuesday morning came after the first attorney had wrapped up her argument. “Gay marriage is an abomination in the eyes of God,” suddenly screamed a protester in the courtroom.After continuing his protest, the man was escorted from the court room. Justice Antonin Scalia quipped, “That was refreshing, actually,” causing loud laughter to ripple through the courtroom. Scalia’s approval of ancient wisdom echoed his previous referral to the ancient Greeks and Romans to argue against government sanctioning of same-sex marriage....

The IRS documents released by the government watchdog group on April 9 revealed that the senator, along with Senator Carl Levin, pressured the agency to go after political nonprofits – which turned out to be overwhelmingly conservative non-profits.. A May 1, 2013, email exchange between Lois Lerner and other top IRS staffers revealed that 11 days prior to Lerner’s admission in a ABA meeting that the IRS had “inappropriately” targeted conservative groups, she met with select top staffers from the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee in a “marathon” meeting to discuss concerns raised by both Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) and Sen....

Members of the Supreme Court questioned on Tuesday whether now is the right time to force states to allow same-sex couples to marry, pointing to how quickly public opinion has shifted on the issue of marriage equality. Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was a key figure in striking down the Defense of Marriage Act in 2013, suggested that he might be worried about the court moving too quickly to force states to marry same-sex couples. “This definition has been with us for millennia,” Kennedy said of male-female marriages. The justice also said it would be very difficult for the court to...

The Supreme Court on Tuesday will hear 2.5 hours of oral arguments that may very well determine the fate of marriage equality in the United States.... a victory for equal marriage would be a narrow win in the broader landscape. So what does the movement for LGBTQ justice look like if the marriage question is finally settled? Remarkably similar, since many of the kinds of discrimination LGBTQ people currently face will remain unaffected by the change. This is particularly true for the decisions we tend to associate with getting married, like where to live, where to work and how to...

Religious institutions could be at risk of losing their tax-exempt status due to their beliefs about marriage if the Supreme Court holds that gay couples have a constitutional right to wed, President Obama’s attorney acknowledged to the Supreme Court today. “It’s certainly going to be an issue,” Solicitor General Donald Verrilli replied when Justice Samuel Alito asked if schools that support the traditional definition of marriage would have to be treated like schools that once opposed interracial marriage. “I don’t deny that.”

The Supreme Court will hear arguments today that could lead to a constitutional right for gays to marry. Many court watchers believe it's a done deal already. In addition to the 4 liberal judges, Justice Anthony Kennedy has already ruled with the majority 3 times against maintaining a ban on same sex marriage. He would appear to be the 5th vote that would make gay marriage the law of the land. But nothing is certain, which is why some observers believe that Chief Justice John Roberts may be a pivotal vote on the question of same sex marriage. New...

Even if the Supreme Court rules for gay marriage, Cruz proves that much still needs to be done for LGBT rights. Today’s oral arguments in the Supreme Court marriage equality case may or may not be exciting, but the importance of the outcome cannot be overstated. We are witnessing before us one of the greatest expansions of civil rights in decades, and if the high court decides to be part of the future instead of the past, this advance will codify into law the basic human right of marriage for gays and lesbians throughout America. This country has come a...

Traditional moral reasoning shows same-sex marriage creates immense harm in the social fabric. Politically correct moral reasoning shows redefinition to be fair - to be all well and good. If political correctness wins, we all have to go around pretending - under the force of the law - that all is well and good. Meanwhile society will be slowly collapsing all around us and we, and our children, will have to suffer the increasingly poor outcomes in silence. Help.