- Joined
- Apr 25, 2010
- Messages
- 80,422
- Reaction score
- 29,077
- Location
- Pittsburgh
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I like the Tenth Amendment....
How is that?
Gays are not slaves or indentured servants.
Got any citations?
How is that?
Gays are not slaves or indentured servants.
You really need to inform yourself before such comments. The same exact thing happened in CA and guess what? Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal = walker's decision was upheld. In this case, the judge's ruling was on firm grounds and the SC will either again refuse the appeal, and marriage will soon be legal in utah again, or the SC will issue its long overdue ruling that SSM is legal nationally.
Oooookay. Apparently you think everyone in the country is gonna turn gay if same sex marriage is made legal...
The phrase "same sex marriage" should be banned. Remove "sex" from this subject. I thought marriage was "commitment", not "sex".
The phrase "same sex marriage" should be banned. Remove "sex" from this subject. I thought marriage was "commitment", not "sex".
Yes, really insightful. Good grief. I just have to assume it is willful, though I don't want to underestimate the lack of IQ I've seen here lately. You know who you are.
Both Prop 8 and DOMA were struck down on the rational that,It appears the Feds have never heard of the Tenth Amendment.
Our federal government believes they can do whatever the **** they want....
We don't have a ****ing democracy - we have an authoritarian federal government...
A passed law is valid until it is squashed/repealed (even while being challenged).
Obamacare is a perfect example.
Which would simply mean that a) the governor cannot void any of these marriages before the final decision is made by whatever highest court will make it, and b) there is still a valid case for a lawsuit since they were still legally allowed to marry. The law cannot void the marriages. They could refuse to recognize them should the state win the appeal (although it is unlikely they will), but not void them because the people did not break any laws in entering into the marriages.
Technically speaking I'm not quite sure I agree with this analysis. True the Governor can't "void" the Civil Marriages and true there will be lawsuits will not ultimately be determined until the SCOTUS rules on the case.
IF the State wins the case, then the law will have been upheld from it's inception. That means those marriages would have been made at a time when such marriages were not authorized in the State. The State could then move to void the marriages as never having been legal in the first place. If they are voided then they wouldn't be
On the other hand if Marriage Equality is upheld, then the law would have voided from it's inception meaning those marriages would remain valid.
The status of the marriages isn't that cut and dried.
>>>>
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?