1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

LGBT News Supreme Court puts a hold on marriage equality in Virginia

Discussion in 'Current Events, World News, & LGBT News' started by uptheirons, Aug 20, 2014.

  1. uptheirons

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2014
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Supreme Court blocks same-sex marriages in Virginia

    Sad breaking news. Supreme Court grants stay of Virginia marriage ruling.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Aldrick

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2012
    Messages:
    2,175
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Virginia
    This was fully expected to happen. I think this pretty much means that the SCOTUS fully intends to take up one or more of the marriage equality cases.

    Read about it from SCOTUSBlog or USA Today.
     
  3. Candace

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2013
    Messages:
    3,819
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southeastern U.S.
    Gender:
    Male
    Aw man :/. I hope that this hold is short lived and doesn't take that much time. C'mon guys, just pass it already!
     
  4. Aldrick

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2012
    Messages:
    2,175
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Virginia
    If I am not mistaken, the next stop is the Supreme Court. If they choose to take the case in September that means we could get a ruling sometime next year, and that means we could see gay marriage nation wide (assuming they rule in our favor - which I believe they will).
     
  5. AlamoCity

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,656
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Lone Star State
    I read the order from the court. They basically left two possible outcomes:


    1) The Court declines to take the case up for review (certiorari) and the stay ends and marriage is legal in Virginia, and basically the whole jurisdiction of the 4th Circuit.

    2) The Court grants certiorari and then they will decide the case and possibly settle the issue once and for all. The stay would remain in place till a final ruling is issued.
     
  6. AwesomGaytheist

    Full Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Messages:
    6,909
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Gender:
    Genderqueer
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I don't think they will. Since they handed down Windsor, they've become more and more partisan (i.e. Hobby Lobby, buffer zones, voting rights) and I'm pretty certain they will not rule in our favor on this one.
     
  7. Aldrick

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2012
    Messages:
    2,175
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Virginia
    AwesomGaytheist -

    I don't disagree that the conservatives on the court have made some horrible rulings. However, in this case they'd have to overturn a lot of previous legal precedent. Basically, they're going to have to disagree with the unanimous rulings of the lower courts, they're going to have to go against the grain of their previous rulings (such as in Windsor), and they're touching on other things such as Loving vs Virginia.

    This was the reason I was of the view that the Supreme Court would side-step the entire debate. They gave their Windsor ruling, which was basically a death blow to all anti-marriage equality efforts in the country, and the lower courts have all been ruling unanimously. They could have just refused to hear the case, and let it die state by state, region by region rather than making one sweeping ruling.

    Now, I'm not sure. I think they might actually take the case, and if they take the case it's hard for me to imagine them ruling against us. Not only are the facts and established legal precedent (much of which has been paved by many of these same justices) on our side, so is the majority of the public. It's clear and obvious which way the wind is blowing on this issue. Momentum will just keep building.

    It's one of the reasons I actually think we'll get both Kennedy AND Roberts on our side. Roberts has his legacy to be concerned about, and Kennedy has always been remarkably pro-gay in his rulings. Why would Kennedy reverse course now? Is Roberts really willing to look like he's essentially on the side of pro-segregationist forces (which is how this will be viewed in about 15-20 years)? That's hard for me to believe.
     
  8. AwesomGaytheist

    Full Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Messages:
    6,909
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Gender:
    Genderqueer
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I understand your thoughts in this, but this court, Kennedy being the deciding vote, has made so. Many. Rulings. That defy basic common sense, like ruling that corporations are now people. Not to mention that by staying these cases for appeal when no state official is bringing the challenge, they directly violated the precedent set in Hollingsworth, where they ruled an outside group can't defend this law when the state officials won't. I think there's a very real chance that they won't rule in our favor and we're royally screwed.
     
  9. AlamoCity

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,656
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Lone Star State
    I know it's probably next to impossible for this to happen, but would it be better if any cases for the time being were "dismissed for want of a substantial federal question" (like in Baker v. Nelson)?

    One thing we have to consider is that the Supreme Court justices could issue a stay for different reasons. It takes five to issue a stay and we could have the entire conservative wing voting for a stay to prevent the ruling from standing and effectively increasing the number of states performing same-sex marriages (through federal judicial fiat) to an unconscionable level. Kennedy (the swing-vote) could be going for a stay for one of many reasons. Heck, the entire Court's members have reasons to want a stay. The liberal wing could actually want to force a stay to compel the issue to eventually reach the Court and resolve the issue.

    Heck, Holligsworth's majority opinion had the most odd mix of justices (Roberts, Scalia, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan :lol:slight_smile: all of whom had different motives for reaching the conclusion of dismissing the suit.

    As for Kennedy's Windsor decision, all I can say is that it was one of the most convoluted opinions I've ever read. The basis for striking Section 2 of DOMA was rooted in both equal protection and federalism. But, Kennedy also recognized that the right to make marriage laws was the domain of the states. I think in United States v. Windsor II, Kennedy will again author the opinion and expand on it and clearly say that, while the right to set marriage standards has historically been a prerogative of the states, it is only so if it does not injure a class of citizens (e.g. gays, racial minorities Loving v. Virginia). Perhaps this will be an opinion where the 14th Amendment is used to incorporate into the "bill of rights" the right to be free from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in regard to marriage.

    Optimistically, United States v. Windsor II's opinion will serve as the basis used later on for United States v. Windsor III, which would establish that sexual orientation is a protected class at the federal level.

    Of course, this is all speculatory :roflmao:
     
    #9 AlamoCity, Aug 21, 2014
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2014
  10. Damien

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2014
    Messages:
    1,246
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Australia.
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    A few people
    I'm sorry, Virginia. There is no Santa Claus.

    Still, you folks in the U.S. are way ahead of us here in Australia. At least you keep pushing for it. With the current government we have in Australia, I think the lgbt community is kind of biding it's time; we will have to wait until these nutjobs are out of office, I suspect, before giving it another go.
     
  11. HuskyPup

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2013
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    An Igloo in Baltimore, Maryland
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I'm prone to agree. I'd like to be optimistic, but I'll believe it when I see it. I could very easily see them leaving it up to the states, and thus, having the same old mess we do now.
     
  12. RebelsRevenge

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2014
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Californa
    Gender:
    Female
    Sexual Orientation:
    Lesbian
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I was so disappointed to hear this in the news but we will not stop and we will press on!!
     
  13. Jinkies

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2011
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    47
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    Gender:
    Female (trans*)
    Gender Pronoun:
    She
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Great! I've missed Scalia's whining.