Comments on: John Dean: Is Boies/Olson’s Federal Anti-Prop 8 Filing A Risk?

By: MichaelPScott

MichaelPScott — Thu, 28 May 2009 22:51:50 +0000

The Supremes don’t HAVE to wait for a “conflict” among circuit courts. They could simply take up a Ninth Circuit decision favorable to gay marriage, and reverse it.

I still say the federal route (for NOW) is, indeed, toxic.

By: gannonguckert

gannonguckert — Thu, 28 May 2009 20:04:43 +0000

Wait a minute!

Remember, the U.S. SupCt doesn’t have to hear any case it doesn’t want to (with a couple teeny exceptions). Its guiding principle for accepting cases is conflict among results in the appellate circuits. If Boies et al., get a win out of the Ninth Circuit, it’ll still be a while before anybody gets a conflicting opinion in another circuit. Even then, what other cases might the Court be considering for a given term several, or ten, years from now?

I’m not so sure the Federal route is so toxic…

By: MichaelPScott

MichaelPScott — Thu, 28 May 2009 17:41:13 +0000

Remember those 18K gay and lesbian marriages already solemnized and then approved by a unanimous California Supreme Court?

The Roberts-Alito-Scalia-Thomas Axis of Homophobia is just waiting to reverse that part of the decision.

Not happy with half a loaf? Howzabout NO loaf?

Running to federal court in this instance is a BAD idea.

By: BoxTurtle

BoxTurtle — Thu, 28 May 2009 16:12:50 +0000

Iowa shocked me, but in a good way. I think the Iowans “Mind your Own Business” attitude came out. But don’t expect that in Ohio. Or Penn.

Money talks. Watch how much marriage/honeymoon business the states that allow it get. Things will change.

Boxturtle (If I owned a honeymoon site in a free state, I’d advertise the heck out of it)

By: Millineryman

Millineryman — Thu, 28 May 2009 16:12:39 +0000

Because he’s the president and he gets to choose who the replacements would be in the event something happens. The longer he serves, the more chances will arise for replacements and his choices have a better shot at preserving rights or correcting injustices.

By: hawkseye36

hawkseye36 — Thu, 28 May 2009 15:58:06 +0000

It’s all a gamble, but I think Olsen and Boise would have a good chance.

By: RevDeb

RevDeb — Thu, 28 May 2009 15:58:06 +0000

with one more to come.

By: Ann in AZ

Ann in AZ — Thu, 28 May 2009 15:57:28 +0000

but since the Supreme Court is packed with Roman Catholics the country could be screwed for a generation anyway.

One has to wonder how many of the soon to be six Catholics are or will be excommunicated during their tenure. The sooner the Pope and Catholic Hierarchy butt out of US politics, the better. There ought to be a law! Oh, yeah, there is a whole Constitution that purports to give all individuals religious freedom in this country. I wonder what it is that the “Christians” don’t understand about that? Btw, this is from a fallen away Catholic who attended Catholic grade school and Catholic High School, just in case anyone is wondering where I get off criticizing.

By: puppethead

puppethead — Thu, 28 May 2009 15:47:04 +0000

I understand the fears of a conservative court, but I don’t quite get the argument. You can’t really “court shop” the Supreme Court. The constitutional questions either have merit or they don’t, that’s why you argue your case. Yes, it’s a risk. But that’s how the system works. The stronger legal argument should win out. Should, but since the Supreme Court is packed with Roman Catholics the country could be screwed for a generation anyway.

By: RevDeb

RevDeb — Thu, 28 May 2009 15:39:34 +0000

I would have agreed with you before Iowa happened. I’m still doing double takes about that. I’m just shaking my head about it all and continuing to fight the good fight.