DOMA unconstitutional (5-4); Court punts on gay marriage (no standing)

Just do what the rest of us are doing, please.

 

kennedy and sotomayer wanted to rule on the merits, not on a technicality.

 

Did you hear about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on technicality...

 

So if people get married in California, that is recognized as a marriage in every state now, yes?

 

No, I don't think so. It is recognized by the federal government.

 

in terms of receiving federal benefits, yes --i believe.

 

Killed the other LEGAL thread by SCOTUS? No credibility whatsoever.

 

Yeah, if a marriage is legal under state statute, the federal government has to recognize it. Alabama can't be required to honor a Vermont gay marriage, w/r/t tax codes, inheritance, etc. But the federal government now is.

Hey, states rights, right?

BTW, Google "gay" -- or perhaps "gay marriage" if you're concerned about work filters.

 

I believe that's correct as well.

 

This piece, from March, explains pretty well what happens now. Basically, marriage equality chaos.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/03/chaos-looms-if-court-strikes-down-doma-and-punts-prop-8/63610/

In the opinion on Prop 8, I wonder how Roberts wrote this with a straight face:

"This is an essential Opinion of the Court limit on our power: It ensures that we act as judges, and do not engage in policymaking properly left to elected representatives."

Any judge is an "activist judge" because he or she has to make a decision on the legality of something. As a Supreme Court judge, you ARE "making policy," and it's stupid for these judges to pretend they don't. If we didn't need judges to interpret the law, we wouldn't have them. Does Roberts think he didn't "make policy" by basically overturning the critical part of what Congress passed numerous times in the Voting Rights Act?

 

And we know what this is going, breaking the rules. All I'm saying is if you want to have rules, then honor them or throw them all out. You can't be selective and have integrity. Have this discussion but have it in the same place the voting rights act is being discussed.