|
Also just because it's getting lost in the joy and mockery, from the SCOTUS blog:quote:A few people are asking when the Obergefell decision takes effect. The opinion doesn't speak to this, and so we should expect it to take effect basically immediately--which is the norm in Supreme court cases. It doesn't look like there's anything for the lower courts to do on remand except issue an injunction saying that these marriage bans are unlawful.
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 20:53 |
|
|
I read Justice Scalia's dissent. Its an angry screed of an increasingly irrelevant section of America that needs to die out as soon as possible. He blasts the Supreme Court for not having any Westerners "(California doesn't count!)", and blasts them for changing the understanding of marriage. His account is that the justices have no place applying the law in such a different way (though he conveniently ignores the part where they overturned inter-racial marriage the same way), and thinks its unfair there isn't an evangelical Christian on the Court. Scalia needs to be impeached, and we can be extremely happy that Justice prevailed, and that he did not carry the day
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
Grey Fox posted:Roberts is a loving coward. He has the power and justification to make a positive impact on this country's civil rights, but instead he's content to wait out the status quo (remember how long it took every state to formally abolish segregation even after the court got involved?) despite the real harm coming to gay and lesbian couples. And he's heading the most liberal Court in three decades. Can you have too much good news? I'm cresting over here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
Ahahaha he's like "access to benefits? Benefits? The Framers didn't even believe in benefits!!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
Grey Fox posted:Roberts is a loving coward. He has the power and justification to make a positive impact on this country's civil rights, but instead he's content to wait out the status quo (remember how long it took every state to formally abolish segregation even after the court got involved?) despite the real harm coming to gay and lesbian couples. What if Kennedy had not gone in favor of marriage equality? Is there any sign that Roberts would have reluctantly changed? Did being a non-deciding vote give Roberts a chance to wash his hands of the dirty work but get his opinion about the process out there?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
TinTower posted:
So he's going to resign because he sits on the very institution that threatens his democracy??
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
xbilkis posted:Scalia footnote: Cresting EDIT: Eat a bag of lawfully committed dicks Scalia
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
Hawkline posted:What if Kennedy had not gone in favor of marriage equality? Is there any sign that Roberts would have reluctantly changed? Did being a non-deciding vote give Roberts a chance to wash his hands of the dirty work but get his opinion about the process out there?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
Scalia's dissent is everything I could have hoped for and more.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
SLOSifl posted:Kennedy was never going to vote against SSM here. Yeah, Kennedy's history on this issue made this one of the easiest decisions to predict in a while. The only question was 5-4 or 6-3
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:37
|
|
|
Hawkline posted:What if Kennedy had not gone in favor of marriage equality? Is there any sign that Roberts would have reluctantly changed? Did being a non-deciding vote give Roberts a chance to wash his hands of the dirty work but get his opinion about the process out there? http://dcist.com/2005/07/john_roberts_an.php quote:No one is very happy about the events that led to this litigation. Her shoelaces were removed, and she was transported in the windowless rear compartment of a police vehicle to a juvenile processing center, where she was booked, fingerprinted, and detained until released to her mother some three hours later -- all for eating a single french fry.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
Poor Roberts, he never learns. His dissent has a lot of "send it to Congress" in it. Also, he says that the principles allowing same-sex marriage would also allow polygamy, does that mean we're about to see a bunch of circuit courts legalizing that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
Shoutout to Alito for being the biggest baby in his dissent. He thinks the majority's interpretation of a "right" is "postmodern", insists that marriage is exclusively about having babies: quote:"This understanding of marriage, which focuses almost slut shames for a while quote:If this traditional understanding of the purpose of marriage and cries about how his bigotry will be persecuted. quote:It will be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to So salty. edit: MY BIGOTRY WONT BE RESPECTED IN SCHOOLS  quote:I assume that Forever_Peace fucked around with this message at 15:44 on Jun 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:40
|
|
|
 Oh poo poo something is going down and they just evacuated the courtroom.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
Don't forget to hydrate. Lots of salt in tears. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
Thomas' dissent is insane. This is hilarious:Justice Scalia posted:Really? Who ever thought that intimacy and spirituality [whatever that means] were freedoms?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:43
|
|
|
I wonder if that minister is going to set himself on fire soon. Does suicide=hell for evangelicals? I know that's true for Catholics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:43
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:
Scalia went critical?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:44
|
|
|
frankenfreak posted:Scalia went critical? super saiyan
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
frankenfreak posted:Scalia went critical? There hasn't been a followup yet from SCOTUSblog.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
WHOOPS posted:Thomas' dissent is insane. This is hilarious:
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
Aurubin posted:I don 't like guns but what the hell is there to dissent to in Johnson? Quickly parsing his dissent, Alito doesn't think that the residual cause is vague, having a sawn-off shotgun in your car while dealing drugs is enough to trigger the residual clause, and that the court has reversed its position on the clause from prior cases
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
http://www.c-span.org/video/?326810-1/supreme-court-rules-54-allow-samesex-marriage&live= Mr Obergefell on CSPAN live
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
quote:Tejinder Looks like no need for alarm.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
Chamale posted:Poor Roberts, he never learns. His dissent has a lot of "send it to Congress" in it. Also, he says that the principles allowing same-sex marriage would also allow polygamy, does that mean we're about to see a bunch of circuit courts legalizing that? In a post-Lemon context, the Morrill Act would almost certainly fail to pass constitutional muster.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:48
|
|
|
Can someone explain why Robert's decent is so off base (from a legal and not a moral perspective)? I am overjoyed at the ruling today, but it seems like his decent is at least based in some legal thinking, and not a Scalia/Alito "gently caress the gays" mindset.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:49
|
|
|
Chamale posted:Poor Roberts, he never learns. His dissent has a lot of "send it to Congress" in it. Also, he says that the principles allowing same-sex marriage would also allow polygamy, does that mean we're about to see a bunch of circuit courts legalizing that? SCOTUSblog said there is specific language saying "two people" so probably not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:http://www.c-span.org/video/?326810-1/supreme-court-rules-54-allow-samesex-marriage&live=
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:51
|
|
|
Kill Dozed posted:Can someone explain why Robert's decent is so off base (from a legal and not a moral perspective)? I am overjoyed at the ruling today, but it seems like his decent is at least based in some legal thinking, and not a Scalia/Alito "gently caress the gays" mindset. Not sure but my first thought that it was pretty crazy that Roberts would say its not the court's job to rule on something that sounds pretty likely to have a lot to do with the equal protection clause.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Scalia's dissent is the angriest thing I've ever read that came from a professional. He doesn't end it with "I respectfully dissent" or even "I dissent", he rants about how this decision just makes the states want to ignore the Supreme Court. I love it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Scalia's dissent is everything I could have hoped for and more. I really want a dramatic reading of it, set to escalating music.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Why hasn't one of the goonier interns figured out how to send out the brief via quadcopter yet
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
Kill Dozed posted:Can someone explain why Robert's decent is so off base (from a legal and not a moral perspective)? I am overjoyed at the ruling today, but it seems like his decent is at least based in some legal thinking, and not a Scalia/Alito "gently caress the gays" mindset. His dissent is off base because historically civil rights have been necessarily declared via the court system because the oppressed minorities aren't able to make it successfully through the democratic process to get the change that is needed. People shouted back during Loving that of course miscegenation should be illegal but legislatures/people should make the call not judges. It took almost 4 decades to get the laws off the books after the court case.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
lol at the thinly veiled anger from a few commenters on scotusblog. A few people have said things like "What does this ruling mean for religious liberty  " even after the third or fourth time they mentioned how Kennedy explicitly says that everyone still has the firs tamendment right to advocate against SSM.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
I'm from Rush Limbaugh's hometown. our local news station's FB feed is as incredible as you'd expect. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
Kill Dozed posted:Can someone explain why Robert's decent is so off base (from a legal and not a moral perspective)? I am overjoyed at the ruling today, but it seems like his decent is at least based in some legal thinking, and not a Scalia/Alito "gently caress the gays" mindset. Can't you argue against it and go, "The Legislative of states did try and decide it, and they did it by being bigoted maroons. Using exclusionary tactics which we all know are unconstitutional, expecting it to stand because the gays are icky." If Roberts came down in favor of SSM today he could have become the biggest inside job for Corportists ever using Social issues as a cover to gut corporate limitations on power for the next century.*(He's doing this anyway.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
emfive posted:Why hasn't one of the goonier interns figured out how to send out the brief via quadcopter yet Make it Dongcopter and you're in business.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
Kill Dozed posted:Can someone explain why Robert's decent is so off base (from a legal and not a moral perspective)? I am overjoyed at the ruling today, but it seems like his decent is at least based in some legal thinking, and not a Scalia/Alito "gently caress the gays" mindset. If it was the majority opinion, it would have effectively created two Americas, depending on where you were born and ow much income you had to flee, violating both your due process and equal protection under the Constitution.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:58
|
|
|
I'm surprised that the opinion avoided the standard of scrutiny for gays entirely and just declared that the SSM bans violated equal protection. Why not explain that it fails even the rational basis test?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 20:53 |
|
|
Crossposting from the TX thread, SSM is a go in Austin: The Travis County Clerk's office has started issuing licenses. They will issue to anyone in line as of 6:30PM and will be open all next week including the weekend.  edit: doh meant to post this in the Marriage equality thread. Oh well leaving it here too. Shifty Pony fucked around with this message at 16:04 on Jun 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 16:00
|
|
