SCOTUS to decide SSM this term

[IceSpear]

Spectacular news!

[pbrower2a]

Well, let us hope that Scotus decides that this decision belongs to legislatures and voters, not activist judges. Unfortunately, I'm not particularly hopeful on that point.

Legislatures? Not many legislatures would so decide. Voters? Neither in Michigan nor Ohio would GOP-dominated state legislatures allow same-sex marriage to appear as a referendum or initiative.

The legal precedents seem well set.

[Bojack Horseman]

As expected, and I'm optimistic as to the final ruling. I'd be extremely shocked if Justice Kennedy didn't vote in support of marriage equality. I think the only question is whether or not it'll be a 5-4 ruling or a 6-3 ruling for 50-state marriage equality. Chief Justice Roberts is definitely a possibility, but more likely than not to be against (even if barely so). I'm hopeful that he'll recognize the correct the decision in this case as one for his legacy. This will be a landmark decision, one that will be remembered for generations ahead. With or without Roberts, I'd be surprised to see anyone other than Kennedy write the majority opinion.

This will be the Roe Vs. Wade of my generation. It will be the Supreme Court decision that the GOP will spend the next 4 decades trying to undo.

[Thomas D]

Speaking of that, if SCOTUS does legalize Marriage Equality in 50 states There will be pressure from the Religious Right on Congress to pass the Federal Marriage Amendment.

I Don't think this will be a problem for the House GOP. But I bet most of the GOP Senators ( many of them up for election in 2016) would rather not have to take that vote.

So what will the Senate Majority Leader do?

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Speaking of that, if SCOTUS does legalize Marriage Equality in 50 states There will be pressure from the Religious Right on Congress to pass the Federal Marriage Amendment.

I Don't think this will be a problem for the House GOP. But I bet most of the GOP Senators ( many of them up for election in 2016) would rather not have to take that vote.

So what will the Senate Majority Leader do?

I imagine McConnell will just ignore it. That being said, it's not like such an amendment could ever get 290 votes in the house and 67 votes in the senate (both of which are required to send an amendment to the states for ratification). Not to mention that the sort of amendment the religious right wants (no gay marriage, no civil unions, nothing) isn't even popular in the south these days - PPP has consistently found that even in southern states that still have majority SSM opposition, there is still usually majority support for civil unions.

[Cory]

I'm afraid they're going to use this as cover for some horrible decision involving economics/finance/the political system, such as striking down the subsidies in the Affordable Care Act.

This is exactly the scenario I'm afraid of. It sounds crass but Id' gladly trade the gay marriage decision for upholding the ACA subsidies.

[LeBron]

I'm not really optimistic at all that Roberts will vote in favor of equality. He did, after all, vote against striking down DOMA, and claimed that the law wasn't motivated by homophobia. On the other hand, Roberts does have a gay cousin who got to get married after SCOTUS's decision on Prop. 8, so it does show Roberts at least has a heart, but I'm skeptical of him supporting the legalization of gay marriage across the country for everyone.

It will come down to Kennedy I think. He does care a lot about protecting state's rights and he has been known to surprise us in some of his votes (like the VRA), though he does have a fairly good pro-gay rights record.

They do need to make this ruling quick though, and preferably the correct one. I find it absolutely ridiculous that SSM is legalized in Oklahoma and Utah of all places before coming to Ohio and Michigan - states with at least a plurality support recognizing marriage equality.

I'm happy with this map, but also very unsatisfied from an Ohio perspective.

[t_host1]

 So, SCOTUS has the supreme power to redefine the word marriage, subject self-identity and purpose to deny standing conscious of another – the adjournment of its being with malice without recourse, is, subjective conscious beyond man’s control, SCOTUS’s futile fallacy of it’s time.   

[SteveRogers]

 So, SCOTUS has the supreme power to redefine the word marriage, subject self-identity and purpose to deny standing conscious of another – the adjournment of its being with malice without recourse, is, subjective conscious beyond man’s control, SCOTUS’s futile fallacy of it’s time.   

That is some cogent legal analysis right there t_host.

[Sopranos Republican]

Well, let us hope that Scotus decides that this decision belongs to legislatures and voters, not activist judges. Unfortunately, I'm not particularly hopeful on that point.

Are you kidding me? I thought you were supposed to be a sensible moderate.

You should have seen what he had to say about SSM in IRC. "If we legalize gay marriage people will become gay for fun!"

"If we ratify the 13th amendment, people will become black for fun!"

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Well, let us hope that Scotus decides that this decision belongs to legislatures and voters, not activist judges. Unfortunately, I'm not particularly hopeful on that point.

Are you kidding me? I thought you were supposed to be a sensible moderate.

You should have seen what he had to say about SSM in IRC. "If we legalize gay marriage people will become gay for fun!"

We don't need gay marriage for that to start happening.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=205916.0

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Well, let us hope that Scotus decides that this decision belongs to legislatures and voters, not activist judges. Unfortunately, I'm not particularly hopeful on that point.

Are you kidding me? I thought you were supposed to be a sensible moderate.

You should have seen what he had to say about SSM in IRC. "If we legalize gay marriage people will become gay for fun!"

We don't need gay marriage for that to start happening.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=205916.0

I was really hoping this would be 20RP12 .

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Well, let us hope that Scotus decides that this decision belongs to legislatures and voters, not activist judges. Unfortunately, I'm not particularly hopeful on that point.

Are you kidding me? I thought you were supposed to be a sensible moderate.

You should have seen what he had to say about SSM in IRC. "If we legalize gay marriage people will become gay for fun!"

We don't need gay marriage for that to start happening.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=205916.0

I was really hoping this would be 20RP12 .

Haha, jeez I totally forgot about that too. That too!! 2013 PAPOY FTW in that argument (or 2012? I forget). Either way, good call.

[DemPGH]

I can conceivably foresee most anything on this. I understand Kennedy and Roberts least, but I guess it'll be 5-4 for SSM, but finding five of these people to issue a sweeping ruling on this for SSM, even now, and even though it just makes so much sense to do so, is nonetheless asking a lot.

I'm afraid they're going to use this as cover for some horrible decision involving economics/finance/the political system, such as striking down the subsidies in the Affordable Care Act.

That's a very reasonable concern knowing this court, and one that I actually share. One big step forward on one issue, one big step backwards on a host of others.

[pbrower2a]

Since most recent decisions have involved federal Circuit courts, the districts in which states without legal SSM are has mattered greatly.

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.