California gay couples hoped SCOTUS would avoid same-sex marriage cases
The Supreme Court’s decision on Friday to review California’s same-sex marriage ban disappointed some Golden State gay couples who would have been able to wed if the court refused to hear the case.
If the court had not taken the case, a federal appeals court ruling that had overturned the ban would have been the law of the state, opening the way to same-sex marriages in California and leaving the nation unchanged.
Now the Supreme Court could decide whether — or not — the U.S. Constitutional guarantees gays the right to marry.
The stakes are now higher, the wait is longer, and there is no certainty gay rights advocates will win.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Is the SCOTUS using a politically correct dictionary or a real dictionary?
Dongemaharu on December 8, 2012 at 11:04 AM
Well if the Chief Justice has a say…..
CW on December 8, 2012 at 11:06 AM
Would a politically correct dictionary be called a “dictionary,” or would it be something more like “non-gender-specific-genital-organ-tionary,” so as not to offend anyone?
steebo77 on December 8, 2012 at 11:07 AM
Because they’re afraid of the truth. Marriage should be regulated by the states. There is no constitutional right to marriage.
ButterflyDragon on December 8, 2012 at 11:31 AM
I just got that. Nice.
philoquin on December 8, 2012 at 11:32 AM
What about polygamist rights?
reddevil on December 8, 2012 at 11:33 AM
No worries, Roberts hasn’t stopped ‘evolving’.
tommy71 on December 8, 2012 at 11:39 AM
As with the imagined “right to privacy” I think SCOTUS is about to find one.
Kataklysmic on December 8, 2012 at 11:40 AM
Well, this might explain why we’ve had the disconnect we have between conservatives and the rest of the Republicans! They’re finding these rights and penumbras when they’re out taking a stroll, not when reading the Constitution!
GWB on December 8, 2012 at 12:14 PM
I think you will get a kick out of this:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2012/12/08/polyamorous-pour-out-polyoutrage-dan-savage
thebrokenrattle on December 8, 2012 at 1:25 PM
Not a federal issue.
But the fact that they’ve agreed to hear it at all ought to signal to gay couples they are about to extend the giant phantom umbrella of “right to privacy” to include gay marriage as well.
NoLeftTurn on December 8, 2012 at 1:32 PM
eh, they’ll find a way to tax it…
bridgetown on December 8, 2012 at 2:07 PM
Dollars to donuts the Mormons are watching this stuff very intently.
MelonCollie on December 9, 2012 at 12:09 AM