1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

U.S. appeals court strikes down California same-sex marriage ban

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by LongTimeListener, Feb 7, 2012.

  1. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    Just released.


    2-1 ruling from the Ninth Circuit, the bane of conservatives' existence.
  2. Point of Order

    Point of Order Active Member

    And the winner is... LTL
  3. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    The Internet took longer to deliver it to where Dick lives.
  4. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Yep, beat me to it by a few seconds it looks like.

    I'm extremely interested to see the court's reasoning.

    If they say that homosexuals are a protected class under the 14th Amendment (thus applying strict scrutiny), I can't get on board.

    If they say that there is no rational basis for the ban (rational basis review), then I might be able to. This was the reasoning of the district court.

    Either way, I think that the Supreme Court is extremely likely to reverse.
  5. Point of Order

    Point of Order Active Member

    This case was tailor-made by Olsen and Bois to fit Justice Kennedy's decision in Lawrence v. Texas. If the case is overturned at the Supreme Court, it will almost certainly be because Kennedy does 180 from his opinion in Lawrence.
  6. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

    I'll take that bet. Odds are, this case won't make it to the Supreme Court, as it's very narrowly defined. But if it does, according to the legal scholars who have been talking about this out here in SoCal for months now, the rulings are very legally sound.
  7. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    The 9th circuit? I'm shocked!

    Why aren't you entertaining the possibility of gender-like intermediate scrutiny? I didn't read the district court opinion, but that seems like the most logical way to go to me. Strict scrutiny for sexual orientation is just the wrong answer and it's a difficult case to make that it doesn't meet rational basis is hard to buy.
  8. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I think so, too, mostly because the lower court ruled on the rational basis review. But the vast, vast, vast majority of the time, the Court will give almost complete carte blanche deference to a law that doesn't involve a protected group or a protected right. I would probably make this one of the exceptions, because I don't think there's a rational basis that's been articulated for a ban on gay marriage. But I don't know if Kennedy goes there.
  9. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    Even in a post-Lopez world, that should not be a high standard.
  10. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Looks like it was rational basis review.

    "Proposition 8 could not have been enacted to advance California's interests in childrearing or responsible procreation, for it had no effect on the rights of same-sex couples to raise children or on the procreative rights of other couples. Nor did Proposition 8 have any effect on religious freedom or on parents' rights to control their children's education; it could not have been enacted to safeguard these liberties."
  11. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    Then it should be reversed. Why didn't they go intermediate scrutiny?
  12. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I know, but I don't think that the Proposition 8 proponents have met it. I'll read the dissent and see if it convinces me otherwise.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page