Gay marriage to Supreme Court? More likely after latest rejection of DOMA. - Christian Science Monitor [ournewsa.blogspot.com]
A federal appeals court panel in New York voted 2 to 1 to declare part of DOMA unconstitutional. The opinion, just three weeks after argument, suggests the judges may have been keeping an eye on the Supreme Court.
The decision by a federal appeals court in New York to invalidate the Defense of Marriage Act improves the already strong prospect that the US Supreme Court will take up the issue of gay marriage this term.
Skip to next paragraph-
In Pictures: Same sex marriage
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
On Thursday, a panel of the Second US Circuit Court of Appeals voted 2 to 1 to declare a portion of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional because the majority judges said it violates the right of same-sex married spouses in New York to equal protection.
The decision marks the second time in five months that a federal appeals court has struck down DOMA on constitutional grounds.
On May 31, the First Circuit in Boston ruled in favor of same-sex couples in Massachusetts, challenging what they argued was the discriminatory nature of DOMA in allowing heterosexual couples to enjoy full federal benefits while denying those same benefits to married couples who are gay and lesbian.
The Supreme Court is poised to soon consider whether to take up as many as six different appeals raising various challenges to DOMA. Adding another appeals court decision to that mix increases the prospect the justices will agree to decide the question.
In addition, the Supreme Court is also poised to consider whether to examine a Ninth Circuit decision striking down California’s Proposition-8 ban on same-sex marriages in that state.
Thursday’s Second Circuit decision is interesting in part because of the lineup of judges and the speed of their work. The opinion striking down the statute was written by Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs, an appointee of President George H.W. Bush, and was joined by Christopher Droney, an Obama appointee.
The dissent was written by Chester Straub, a Clinton appointee.
Argument in the case took place three weeks ago on Sept. 27. The majority opinion totals 43 pages, and the dissent, 40. Some federal appeals courts are known for their rocket docket, but the Second Circuit is generally not among them.
The fast opinion suggests the judges â€" like the parties in litigation â€" may have kept one eye on the Supreme Court throughout the process.
The Second Circuit decision drew praise from gay rights activists and supporters and criticism from opponents.
“Today’s ruling is the second by a federal appellate court and the 10th ruling in a row from judges appointed by presidents from Nixon to Reagan to George W. Bush, all agreeing that this disgraceful and discriminatory gay exception to the way the federal government treats married couples must end,†said Evan Wolfson, president and founder of Freedom to Marry.
“The Supreme Court should swiftly agree to hear one or more of these cases and definitively strike down the so-called Defense of Marriage Act,†he said in a statement.
“Supporters of equality have a great deal to celebrate today,†says a statement from the liberal Center for American Progress. “The fact that this decision came from such a conservative judge makes it all the more likely that the Supreme Court will ultimately strike down the Defense of Marriage Act.â€
Brian Brown, president of the conservative National Organization for Marriage, agreed that the decision points up the need for the Supreme Court to enter the fray. But he’s expecting a different outcome.
“This is yet another example of judicial activism and elite judges imposing their views on the American people,†Mr. Brown said in a statement. “The American people are entitled to a definitive ruling in support of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, as 32 states have determined through popular vote,†he said.
The Second Circuit case involves a challenge to the federal estate tax by Edith Windsor of New York City. Ms. Windsor and Thea Spyer were married in 2007 in
Suggest Gay marriage to Supreme Court? More likely after latest rejection of DOMA. - Christian Science Monitor IssuesQuestion by Thank God For Evolution!: Should India implement the "One Child Policy" like China? Let's face it, India is a mess...famine, poverty, pestilence...too many mouths to feed...and the problem/population is only getting worse/bigger. Doesn't it make sense for India to implement a "One Child Policy" like China did to combat overpopulation? Best answer for Should India implement the "One Child Policy" like China?:
Answer by zot
won't work there's too many religious groups and they all F***K like rabbits
Answer by Justin L
No.
Answer by Owen
In a democracy, it'd never work.
Answer by Exitwound
Yes. I think that should be a world policy.
Answer by Brido
I think that's the goal of the New World Order. The UN has said that they need to reduce the Earth's population by 80% to make us more manageable, now they can do that by advocating birth control, but look at the high numbers of teenage pregnancy, or they can do it, by killing off Africans and other third world countries first, wether through preventable disease, vaccines or famine. I don't doubt that it will be introduced as some in the media have even said that children are bad for the environment and we should all be thinking of having one child for mother earth's sake.
inFamous 2 - 34 - Die Wendung!Jetzt wird es RICHTIG Interessant! All commented copyrighted/tredemarked media is owned by their respective companies and persons. Videos uploaded are commentary in nature,as defined under the 'Fair use' policy of copyright. I do not use it to make any kind of profit. Alle hier gezeigten kommentierten Materiallen und Markenzeichen sind Eigentum der entsprechenden Urheber. Dieses Material dient ausschließlich der kreativen Kommunikation und ich schlage keinerlei Profit daraus.
0 comments:
Post a Comment