Why Are Attorneys Ted Olson And David Boies Wrong In Bringing Prop 8 To Federal Court?

http://www.stevelackner.com/ ^ | June 3, 2004 | Steven W. Lackner

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

How long before polygamy is legalized?

[csense]

How long before polygamy is legalized?

Once they figure out that the quantitative is inferred by the qualitative, if they haven't already. The first step though, is to reassign the qualitative premise, and that's nearing completion.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

They are wrong because they are treating marriage as a federal right, even though marriage has always been a state-controlled privilege.

Correct.

Reynolds v. United States, 1878.

[Gemsbok]

Brer Rabbit & Brer Fox

[Tenniel2]

Recall the last time someone ducked the right decision, hoping that SCOTUS would do the job for him.

(Hints: "W," "McCain-Feingold.")

[DH]

That is why everyone intuitively understands there is nothing wrong with having a Boy Scouts and a Girl Scouts, but there would be something very wrong with having a White Scouts and a Black Scouts.

Now I am really confused.  How come there is something wrong with having a Miss white America but nothing wrong with having a Miss black America?

 

[DrC]

“They are wrong because they are treating marriage as a federal right, even though marriage has always been a state-controlled privilege.”

I think you’ve misinterpreted their position. They are arguing that the same Constitutional privacy right that the Supreme Court has earlier found to govern the freedom to choose a marital partner of a different race is applicable to gays as well.

“The Constitution does not specifically mention a right to privacy. However, Supreme Court decisions over the years have established that the right to privacy is a basic human right, and as such is protected by virtue of the 9th Amendment. The right to privacy has come to the public’s attention via several controversial Supreme Court rulings, including several dealing with contraception (the Griswold and Eisenstadt cases), interracial marriage (the Loving case), and abortion (the well-known Roe v Wade case). In addition, it is said that a right to privacy is inherent in many of the amendments in the Bill of Rights, such as the 3rd, the 4th’s search and seizure limits, and the 5th’s self-incrimination limit.” http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#privacy

While the Bill of Rights (first 10 amendments) originally applied only to Federal government, the Supreme Court has gradually extended these rights to also apply to the states. Thus, any right to privacy found in the first 10 amendments would limit state action as well as federal action. This is the underpinning for their claim that states are not permitted to erect barriers to gay marriage.