[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

AI is exhausting the power grid. Tech firms are seeking a miracle solution.

Rare Van Halen Leicestershire, Donnington Park August 18, 1984 Valerie Bertinelli Cameo

If you need a Good Opening for black, use this.

"Arrogant Hunter Biden has never been held accountable — until now"

How Republicans in Key Senate Races Are Flip-Flopping on Abortion

Idaho bar sparks fury for declaring June 'Heterosexual Awesomeness Month' and giving free beers and 15% discounts to straight men

Son of Buc-ee’s co-owner indicted for filming guests in the shower and having sex. He says the law makes it OK.

South Africa warns US could be liable for ICC prosecution for supporting Israel

Today I turned 50!

San Diego Police officer resigns after getting locked in the backseat with female detainee

Gazan Refugee Warns the World about Hamas

Iranian stabbed for sharing his faith, miraculously made it across the border without a passport!

Protest and Clashes outside Trump's Bronx Rally in Crotona Park

Netanyahu Issues Warning To US Leaders Over ICC Arrest Warrants: 'You're Next'

Will it ever end?

Did Pope Francis Just Call Jesus a Liar?

Climate: The Movie (The Cold Truth) Updated 4K version

There can never be peace on Earth for as long as Islamic Sharia exists

The Victims of Benny Hinn: 30 Years of Spiritual Deception.

Trump Is Planning to Send Kill Teams to Mexico to Take Out Cartel Leaders

The Great Falling Away in the Church is Here | Tim Dilena

How Ridiculous? Blade-Less Swiss Army Knife Debuts As Weapon Laws Tighten

Jewish students beaten with sticks at University of Amsterdam

Terrorists shut down Park Avenue.

Police begin arresting democrats outside Met Gala.

The minute the total solar eclipse appeared over US

Three Types Of People To Mark And Avoid In The Church Today

Are The 4 Horsemen Of The Apocalypse About To Appear?

France sends combat troops to Ukraine battlefront

Facts you may not have heard about Muslims in England.

George Washington University raises the Hamas flag. American Flag has been removed.

Alabama students chant Take A Shower to the Hamas terrorists on campus.

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

Deadly Saltwater and Deadly Fresh Water to Increase

Deadly Cancers to soon Become Thing of the Past?

Plague of deadly New Diseases Continues

[FULL VIDEO] Police release bodycam footage of Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley traffi

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus

Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Back PRIORS AND PRECEDENT Same-Sex Marriage Gets Its Big Day At The Supreme Court
Source: FiveThirtyEight
URL Source: http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/ ... -big-day-at-the-supreme-court/
Published: Apr 28, 2015
Author: Oliver Roeder
Post Date: 2015-04-29 12:33:58 by Jameson
Keywords: SCOTUS, Marraige, 538
Views: 23180
Comments: 119

The question of whether there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage will finally have its day in court this week. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear two and a half hours of oral argument in a quartet of cases on this subject. If the court reverses lower court rulings that upheld bans on same-sex marriage, it could mean that every state would have to honor such marriages performed in other states, and could require every state to permit them. A decision is expected this summer, most likely in late June. In this edition of Priors and Precedent, we’ll dig into some data and two sources of predictions for this landmark case. First, some background.

The Case

The petitioners are 12 couples and two widowers from states that bar same-sex marriage. A recent profile by NPR dubbed them “‘accidental activists,’ meaning they filed lawsuits not to further a cause but because of the way the bans affected their lives.”

The challenge to the bans, known as Obergefell v. Hodges, is actually four cases rolled into one.1 The court consolidated them and limited its consideration to these two questions:

Does the 14th Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex? Does the 14th Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state?

The first is called the “marriage” question, the second the “recognition” question. The court will hear 90 minutes of argument on the former and an hour of argument on the latter. Civics refresher: The 14th Amendment guarantees certain rights under its “due process” and “equal protection” clauses.

If the answer to the first question is “yes,” then the answer to the second is irrelevant, of course.

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 17.

#2. To: Jameson (#0)

"Does the 14th Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex?"

Why two people? Why not three?

misterwhite  posted on  2015-04-29   12:43:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: misterwhite, Jameson (#2)

Why two people? Why not three?

Why not four?

deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Why would an ultra-liberal interpretation not apply to protect the love expressed by those of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA)? Are those not persons?

Why would a certain judge in New York not apply her interpretation of person to protect the love of a chimpanzee and any other(?) person.

Obergefell v Hodges, Dir. Ohio Depart of Health, U.S. Supreme Court No 14-556, Official Transcript of Oral Arguent, April 28, 2015.

In citation, Obergefell is the first named case. Other named cases are Tanco v Haslam No. 14-565 (Tennessee), DeBoer v Snyder No.14-571 (Michigan), and Bourke v Beshear No. 14-575 (Kentucky).

Transcript of Oral Argument, Part 1 of 2, at 10:02 a.m.

Transcript of Oral Argument, Part 2 of 2, at 11:39 a.m.

In part 1 at 18,

17 JUSTICE ALITO: Well, what if there's no -- 18 these are 4 people, 2 men and 2 women, it's not -- it's 19 not the sort of polygamous relationship, polygamous 20 marriages that existed in other societies and still 21 exist in some societies today. And let's say they're 22 all consenting adults, highly educated. They're all 23 lawyers. 24 (Laughter.)

nolu chan  posted on  2015-04-29   16:59:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: nolu chan (#8)

Why would an ultra-liberal interpretation not apply to protect the love expressed by those of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA)? Are those not persons?

Why would a certain judge in New York not apply her interpretation of person to protect the love of a chimpanzee and any other(?) person.

Yes....the slippery slope argument....

Always popular in these discussions.

I'm not sure any of this applies to the North American Marlin Brando Look-Alikes (NAMBLA) ....but good point anyway!

Jameson  posted on  2015-04-30   8:12:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 17.

#27. To: Jameson, nolu chan, liberator, BobCeleste, GarySpFc (#17)

Why would an ultra-liberal interpretation not apply to protect the love expressed by those of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA)? Are those not persons? Why would a certain judge in New York not apply her interpretation of person to protect the love of a chimpanzee and any other(?) person.

Yes....the slippery slope argument....

Always popular in these discussions.

I'm not sure any of this applies to the North American Marlin Brando Look-Alikes (NAMBLA) ....but good point anyway!

And a very valid slippery slope. The usual argument is there are state laws protecting minors from NAMBLA predators. This SCOTUS case is case in point that state laws can and are changed with a proper lobbying apparatus, advertisement and MONEY.

If one state...(maybe Colorado?) allows pederast marriage, you bet that would be going to the SCOTUS once the pederast decides to move to CA and wants that pederast marriage 'legal.'

There is over 10,000 years of historical evidence of a one man-one woman marriage being the best for society and raising children. Polygamy comes in second in historical evidence but only for the elite who could afford them. And we have ample evidence in the Bible where those who did have polygamous marriages ending up having strife, infighting and sons from different mothers vying for the inheritance.

The US and the rest of the West have bought in to the 'theology' of the souless minions of liberal marxism.

redleghunter  posted on  2015-04-30 10:51:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: Jameson (#17)

Why would an ultra-liberal interpretation not apply to protect the love expressed by those of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA)? Are those not persons?

Why would a certain judge in New York not apply her interpretation of person to protect the love of a chimpanzee and any other(?) person.

Yes....the slippery slope argument....

It is a constitutional argument. Justice Alito raisded the question "Well, what if there no -- these are 4 people, 2 men and 2 women, it not - it's not the sort of polygamous relationship ... [a]nd lets say they're all consenting adults, highly educated. They're all lawyers."

Why would the legal logic offered for same-sex marriage not extend to polygamous marriage? Or Man-boy marriage?

The 14th amendment provides that "No state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

If the 14th amendment is the basis, what persons does it not apply to? How is it limited? What are the possible unintended consequences?

For real resistance, picture an orthodox rabbi being ordered to perform a marriage between a gay Jew and a gay non-Jew.

Quite obviously, "All persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," applies to anchor babies, even babies born of two illegal aliens in a detention center awaiting deportation.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-04-30 14:09:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 17.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com