Polls on Same-Sex Marriage State Laws

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Happy Gay Marriage Eve, Florida!

[ilikeverin]

Gays are ruining the sanctity of marriage all over Florida, now!

However, in many counties in northern Florida, they will be unable to do so in the courthouse they get their licenses from, because the county has shut down the courthouse to all weddings (gay or straight) in order to prevent having to "endorse" gay marriage.  Classy! http://www.news4jax.com/news/duval-county-clerk-of-court-discontinues-all-wedding-ceremonies/30548568

[RR1997]

Congrats Flo!

[pbrower2a]

WASHINGTON, Jan 8 (Reuters) - The nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, who opted in October not to take up the issue of state bans on gay marriage, are set to meet behind closed doors on Friday to consider once again whether to hear any cases on the contentious issue.

The court has five cases pending concerning same-sex marriage prohibitions in Ohio, Tennessee, Michigan, Kentucky and Louisiana.

The legal issue is whether the state bans violate the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law. An announcement could be made as soon as Friday after the justices meet as part of their customary private deliberations over which new cases to hear.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/08/supreme-court-gay-marriage_n_6436332.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

[pbrower2a]

IT'S HAPPENING

Not usually at 9PM. Hold your horses. The law does not change until the decision is made and published.

Good reasons exist for this decision being made behind closed doors. Some of the arguments of some State officials could be unduly explicit. Such would likely backfire, but they would also be inappropriate for those who might be obliged to see this case changing a basic legal reality in American life. Are there more same-sex couples than there are mixed-race couples involving blacks, whites, or Asians?

Because of the number of people involved, this is likely more important than Loving v. Virginia. Imaginable results that I see are:

1. That the US Supreme Court finds in the arguments by the defendants of bans on SSM that a new and compelling reason exists to make SSM  either illicit altogether (almost certain not to happen!) or a states' right option (in either case the Supreme Court would have to repudiate a recent decision, which the Supreme Court almost never does). States seeking to overturn bans on SSM would need specific legislation to permit SSM.

2. That the Supreme Court upholds SSM bans that have not yet been abolished, letting the decision of the Sixth Circuit Court stand but recognizing the decisions of lower courts to allow SSM. Does the Attorney-General of Michigan have a stronger case than the other defenders of SSM? We cannot be absolutely sure until the decision is made.

3. That the Supreme Court recognizes a right granted by a Circuit Court and recognized by the Supreme Court in other states is valid elsewhere. Thus if there is no compelling principle for an SSM ban in Wisconsin or Indiana, there is no compelling principle for a ban on SSM in Michigan, either. 

Possibility #1 undoes most decisions of courts abolishing SSM bans. Possibility #2 maintains the current status of SSM bans. Possibility #3 abolishes all SSM bans.

[pbrower2a]

Here's how Case 1 would go:

from this

Method of legalization of SSM

resulting from a state court decision invalidating an SSM ban
resulting from state legislation
resulting from the decision of the DC Council
resulting from a statewide initiative or referendum
resulting from a decision by the US Supreme Court
resulting from a decision by a federal court subsidiary to the US Supreme Court

Method of legalization of SSM

resulting from a state court decision invalidating an SSM ban
resulting from state legislation
resulting from the decision of the DC Council
resulting from a statewide initiative or referendum


Even the legalization of SSM in California would be nullified because the final decision was by the US Supreme Court. Appellate findings that nullified SSM bans in Oregon  and Pennsylvania would also be set aside.  Of course the Democratic-controlled state legislature of California would quickly re-establish the legality of SSM by legislation, and very quickly. Others? Don't be so sure.  The next chance for many states to allow SSM would either be late in 2016 (initiative or referendum) or specific legislation by non-GOP state legislatures elected in November 2016.

[pbrower2a]

Here is Case 2, in which remaining SSM bans are upheld but existing bans remain intact:


States in white (and DC) already have legalized same-sex marriages.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You're being way overdramatic pbrower.  SCOTUS always meets behind closed doors when it decides what cases it will hear.  With the circuits split on a topic that impacts so many people (and that doesn't even count those who think their marriage would somehow be impacted by having the state recognize the marriages of same-sex couples) the only real decisions to be made are when to hear a case and which case from which circuit will serve as the lead case.  But in any event, no final decision will be handed down tomorrow.

[pbrower2a]

You're being way overdramatic pbrower.  SCOTUS always meets behind closed doors when it decides what cases it will hear.  With the circuits split on a topic that impacts so many people (and that doesn't even count those who think their marriage would somehow be impacted by having the state recognize the marriages of same-sex couples) the only real decisions to be made are when to hear a case and which case from which circuit will serve as the lead case.  But in any event, no final decision will be handed down tomorrow.

True -- and we may have nothing more than a date on which oral arguments are made.

If anything, Michigan seems to be the most likely case because it has multiple issues related to SSM and SSM family life.  

I can make wild predictions on what the Supreme Court will decide as alternatives because Judicial findings are invariably capricious -- until they are made. Then, and only then, are they final.  

Some decisions will be made by the Fifth Circuit Court on Friday.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

You're being way overdramatic pbrower. 

Couldn't this be repeated after pretty much every pbrower post? (No offence)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You're being way overdramatic pbrower. 

Couldn't this be repeated after pretty much every pbrower post? (No offence)

There's a difference between "overdramatic" and "way overdramatic".   More seriously, he isn't always overdramatic, even on this topic.

[pbrower2a]

You're being way overdramatic pbrower. 

Couldn't this be repeated after pretty much every pbrower post? (No offence)

I do not predict jury verdicts or judicial findings. Crazy-seeming results are possible, and some of those have bizarre consequences.

We may have a definitive answer very soon after which case this thread gets locked. 

[pbrower2a]

TEXAS, Louisiana, and Mississippi may be next

(size is proportional to electoral votes)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/5th-circuit-looks-poised-strike-down-same-sex-marriage-bans

[pbrower2a]

South Dakota --

A judge ruled South Dakota's gay marriage ban unconstitutional on Monday.

U.S. District Court Judge Karen E. Schreier wrote that the plaintiffs in the case "have a fundamental right to marry."

"South Dakota law deprives them of that right solely because they are same-sex couples and without sufficient justification," Schreier wrote.

The decision is stayed pending a possible appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.

 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/12/south-dakota-gay-marriage_n_6458402.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices&ir=Gay%20Voices

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

don't think anybody has posted this poll yet

national support at 62%!

[pbrower2a]

Michigan -- same-sex marriage is recognized, but with a catch:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/15/michigan-recognize-gay-marriage_n_6479500.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices&ir=Gay%20Voices

Only during a narrowly-opened window of opportunity before an appellate court denied further marriages. No further same-sex marriages need be permitted under this ruling.

A federal judge just nullified one of the most egregious denials of marital rights in one state.

 

[pbrower2a]

Meeting behind closed doors on Friday, the nine justices decided to review a 2-1 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit that upheld bans on same-sex marriage in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee. The decision by two judges on the Cincinnati-based court, both appointed by President George W. Bush, marked the first time a federal appeals court backed a same-sex marriage ban after other appellate courts had found similar bans unconstitutional. That split among the circuit courts likely drove the justices to pick up the case.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments and probably rule by June.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/16/supreme-court-gay-marriage_n_6439926.html

[pbrower2a]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/22/gop-gay-marriage-2016_n_6525360.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices

[Thomas D]

"Federal judge strikes down Alabama's same-sex marriage ban"


http://www.al.com/news/mobile/index.ssf/2015/01/federal_judge_in_mobile_strike.html

[pbrower2a]

A federal judge...U.S. District Judge Callie V.S. Granade, ruled that Alabama's constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, known as the Sanctity of Marriage Amendment, violates the 14th Amendment's due process and equal protection clauses.

"If anything, Alabama’s prohibition of same-sex marriage detracts from its goal of promoting optimal environments for children," Granade writes. "Those children currently being raised by same-sex parents in Alabama are just as worthy of protection and recognition by the State as are the children being raised by opposite-sex parents. Yet Alabama’s Sanctity laws harms the children of same-sex couples for the same reasons that the Supreme Court found that the Defense of Marriage Act harmed the children of same-sex couples.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/23/alabama-gay-marriage_n_6535610.html"

[pbrower2a]

This isn't exactly an approval-disapproval poll, but it allows some conclusions:

January 15-18, 2015
Survey of 1,042 Pennsylvania voters

Pennsylvania Survey Results
Q1
Has the legalization of gay marriage in Pennsylvania had a positive or negative impact
on your life, or has it not had any impact at all?

11% Positive Impact
...............................................

23% Negative Impact
..............................................

65% No Impact at All
...............................................


This looks like overall endorsement of the status quo.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2014/PPP_Release_PA_129.pdf

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Nearly one quarter of Pennsylvanians are complete dopes. Good to know.

[pbrower2a]

Same-sex marriages now taking place in Alabama --  (at least for now the US Supreme Court says so). Judge Roy Moore has a poor track record in getting his way. What is it with Arkansas and Mississippi?

White -- SSM equality by law.
Yellow -- toss-up

 

States in white (and DC) already have legalized same-sex marriages. Other states are coded by district in those in which SSM will not have been permanently legalized as of 10 AM EST on 6 January 2015:

Status of SSM in Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, or the Northern Marianas not shown.

5th circuit
6th circuit*
8th circuit
11th circuit

*Next appeal, US Supreme court.

Colors for districts have no other political significance.

DC and all states within the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 7th, 9th, and 10th appellate districts have legalized SSM.


Here are the numbers:

Compiled results are listed below. The headers for each column are: State/ Support Legalising Gay Marriage/ Oppose Legalising Gay Marriage/ Net Support.

MA    71    19    +52
VT    71    20    +51
RI    68    20    +48
NH    63    24    +39
CT    61    26    +35
NY    61    27    +34
HI    59    26    +33
CA    58    31    +27
ME    63    37    +26
NM    57    32    +25
WA    57    32    +25
NV    55    31    +24
DE    54    31    +23
NJ    54    32    +22
OR    56    35    +21
IA    53    33    +20
IL    53    33    +20
CO    54    35    +19
MN    52    34    +18
AK    50    36    +14
WI    51    37    +14
MD    48    36    +12
PA    49    38    +11
ND    48    39    +9
MI    47    39    +8
AZ    47    40    +7
VA    47    40    +7
FL    46    40    +6
OH    45    40    +5
MT    45    41    +4
KS    44    41    +3
SD    43    43    0
IN    43    45    -2
NC    42    46    -4
MO    41    47    -6
NE    40    46    -6
LA    39    46    -7
WV    39    48    -9
GA    37    47    -10
SC    37    47    -10
KY    38    50    -12
TX    37    50    -13
OK    37    51    -14
WY    33    50    -17
ID    33    51    -18
AR    32    54    -22
UT    34    56    -22
MS    29    56    -27
TN    29    58    -29
AL    28    60    -32

US    48    39    +9

[pbrower2a]

It's not in the United States, but it is interesting. An extensive law against same-sex marriage, adoption by same-sex couples, and whether parents can exclude their children from sex education was rejected in a popular referendum in Slovakia despite strong support from the Catholic Church.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

(Basically, people could vote against the three referenda by not voting).

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/08/slovakia-anti-gay-rights-referendum_n_6641666.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices

[Adam Griffin]

Public Religion Research Institute just released a poll of all 50 states:

http://publicreligion.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/PRRI-Views-on-Gay-Marriage-by-State.pdf


New Hampshire   75   19
Massachusetts   73   21
Rhode Island   70   19
Connecticut   67   26
Vermont   67   32
New Jersey   66   27
Hawaii   64   31
Maine   63   30
New York   63   28
Oregon   63   30
Washington   63   29
California   61   31
Colorado   60   32
Nevada   60   32
Illinois   59   34
Wisconsin   59   33
Arizona   58   33
Minnesota   58   33
New Mexico   58   36
Delaware   57   31
Iowa   57   37
Maryland   56   37
Pennsylvania   56   37
Michigan   55   37
Alaska   54   35
Nebraska   54   39
Idaho   53   41
Ohio   53   39
Florida   52   40
Kansas   50   43
North Dakota   50   39
Virginia   50   43
Texas   48   43
Indiana   47   45
Missouri   47   44
Montana   47   43
Oklahoma   47   48
Georgia   44   47
North Carolina   44   49
South Dakota   44   48
Utah   43   50
Louisiana   42   48
Wyoming*   41   49
Kentucky   40   54
South Carolina   39   54
Tennessee   39   55
West Virginia   37   55
Arkansas   36   59
Alabama   32   59
Mississippi   32   61