Marriage Equality and the Supreme Court

[palbert]

Monday, 29 Sept., is the first Supreme Court (SCOTUS) conference of the 2014-2015 term. All are waiting to see if any, which, or all of the presently pending marriage equality and marriage recognition cases are to be listed for argument later in the term. There is no requirement that the Court act tomorrow.

For the first conference of its upcoming term on Monday, the court has docketed five cases seeking marriage equality for which petitions for certiorari have been filed: Kitchen v. Herbert, the Utah case; Bishop v. Smith, the Oklahoma case; Bostic v. Schaefer, the Virginia case; Wolf v. Walker, the Wisconsin case; and Baskin v. Bogan, the Indiana case.

It takes a vote of four justices out of the nine to grant certiorari (or decide to take up a case) for any particular case. Most observers expect the Supreme Court to take up one or more of the cases to decide an issue with such nationwide importance as marriage equality, but justices are under no obligation to take up a case and may well hold off on a decision until a later conference.

http://www.washingtonblade.com/2014/09/2...Pphz9.dpuf

The fly in the ointment may be that there has yet to be a circuit (appellate) court decision finding in favor of the ban. A conflict among the circuits is necessary for one type of SCOTUS jurisdiction.

That conflict jurisdiction may come from the Sixth Circuit, which has heard argument but has yet to render a decision. Justice Ruth Bade Ginsburg has highlighted the importance of a Sixth Circuit decision to the timing.

Justice Ginsburg lifts curtain on how Supreme Court might view same-sex marriage [Christian Science Monitor]

Ginsburg said cases pending before the circuit (- the Sixth -) covering Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee would probably play a role in the high court’s timing. She said “there will be some urgency” if that appeals court allows same-sex marriage bans to stand. Such a decision would run contrary to a legal trend favoring gay marriage and force the Supreme Court to step in sooner, she predicted.

She said if the appeals panel falls in line with other rulings there is “no need for us to rush.”

Confidence is high that Justices Elena Kagan and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, both of whom have performed gay marriages, will support SCOTUS review.

I will keep the Board advised.

***

For those wishing to follow developments a good resource is Equality on Trial at http://equalityontrial.com/ .

For the really devoted there is SCOTUSblog at http://www.scotusblog.com/

[princealbertofb]

On the other hand, one wonders why one has to wait for a Supreme Court decision to live with the person one chooses to love and bed.... It's crazy stuff. Life has become soooooo complicated. Your life is regulated by laws. So far so good; we've elected the ones who've passed them... But waiting for 4 or more total strangers to take up your case of / and right to intimacy, is somewhat weird. At least it's happy that we can more or less use our bodies as we see fit... almost. No other animal does to its group what we humans do to one another.

[Cuddly]

On the other hand, one wonders why one has to wait for a Supreme Court decision to live with the person one chooses to love and bed.... It's crazy stuff. Life has become soooooo complicated. Your life is regulated by laws. So far so good; we've elected the ones who've passed them... But waiting for 4 or more total strangers to take up your case of / and right to intimacy, is somewhat weird. At least it's happy that we can more or less use our bodies as we see fit... almost. No other animal does to its group what we humans do to one another.

Mhm.. The complications of our insignificant lives are one of my favourite day-dreams. Luckily, it seems alot of us are waking up and coming to understand that if we do not care for the environment, more than we do, we will cease to exist. The facebook thing going around, telling you to hold your breath while you count your money, sums it up nicely.
Eco-friendly isn't financially viable? Well, the alternative non-eco-friendly option isn't viable at all.
I won't even begin to think about racism of any kind - it's so ridiculous.
The fact that some of the smartest (or atleast highest ranked) people of the world need to take a vote on something as basic as simple human rights makes me long for the apocalypse.

What I'm trying to say is that our "strength" should be dedicated to finding viable alternatives to maintain our lavish lifestyles, without destroying the planet at breakneck pace.