Appeals Court: Prop 8 Unconstitutional
- Thread starter Bonestorm
- Start date
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
this decision is not a surprise. romney is already ranting about "unelected" judges overturning the will of the people. i guess in romney's view, as long as the "will" of the people violate your constitutional rights, then our third branch is powerless to redress that. 
i haven't read the case, but the news snippet i read mentioned rational basis, i presumed a hybrid scrutiny, so will have to read more to determine how the courts are reviewing this issue, given, they have held marriage is a fundamental right.
i haven't read the case, but the news snippet i read mentioned rational basis, i presumed a hybrid scrutiny, so will have to read more to determine how the courts are reviewing this issue, given, they have held marriage is a fundamental right.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
surprisingly, one part of the government actually wanted to preserve a right, not throw it under the bus in the name of government interest.this decision is not a surprise. romney is already ranting about "unelected" judges overturning the will of the people. i guess in romney's view, as long as the "will" of the people violate your constitutional rights, then our third branch is powerless to redress that.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
what? which branch wanted to preserve what right?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
apparently the judicial branch wanted to preserve a right of americans protected by the 14th Amendment.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
Merged.
last time i checked, it is the job of the courts to determine if a law is constitutional - no matter how many people voted for the law
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
it is just nigel trying to make a funny
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
read more of the case, i am surprised by the narrow ruling. they only considered california's unique situation, that being a right was taken away vis a vis prop 8. they did not apply general constitutional principles, though they could have.
i read a brief opinion by con law attorney and he opined that scotus will probably not take the case as it is narrowly tailored only to california and scotus usually only takes cases that affect the entire country. makes sense, because if the court leans in favor of the 9th ruling, then there really is no reason to take the case and this means that the 9th circ will be the last word for california.
i read a brief opinion by con law attorney and he opined that scotus will probably not take the case as it is narrowly tailored only to california and scotus usually only takes cases that affect the entire country. makes sense, because if the court leans in favor of the 9th ruling, then there really is no reason to take the case and this means that the 9th circ will be the last word for california.
Rationalist
Hail Voltaire
I'm not sure how comfortable I am with the precedent set by the ruling. The matter will eventually make it to the SCOTUS, and while I am for gay marriage, I would prefer it remain a State issue.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
what does DOMA have to do with california?
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
unfortunately the federal gov has to occasionally step in. see loving v. virginia...imagine if that were left solely up to the state.
You know, I haven't been able to find whether Califronia supports DOMA or not. I did learn that marriage is defined as between a man and a woman. Let's hope the SC upholds that.
Socrtease
Verified User
And the same arguments about states rights and leaving the issue of marriage up to the states were made when Loving was decided. If the anti-gay marriage crowd had their way, the SCOTUS would have never ruled on that issue either.
doma is a law not a constitutional amendment
challenges to doma are in the pipeline and i expect it too will be overturned on constitutional grounds
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
Thank God liberal judges haven't handed down rulings such as Kelo v. New London.
poet
Banned
It's no judicial tyranny. It's courts upholding equal rights under the law.