.
Feedback

Breaking: US Supreme Court to Review Prop. 8

The highest court will examine the constitutionality of the gay marriage law.

Bloomberg News is reporting that the US Supreme Court will examine California's gay marriage law to see if the 14th Amendment bars the state from defining marriage in a traditional way.

The SCOTUS Blog posted this update Friday afternoon via CoveritLive:

"Prop. 8 is granted on the petition question -- whether 14th Am. bars Calif. from defining marriage in traditional way. Plus an added question: Whether the backers of Prop.. 8 have standing in the case under Art. III."

In 2008, 52 percent of California voters approved Proposition 8. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the law in February, ruling Prop. 8 unconstitutional. Prop. 8 supporters then appealed to the country's highest court.

This chronology of the history of gay marriage from the Los Angeles Times explains the complex road that has led to today.

The SCOTUS Blog also clarified the immediate impact of the court's decision Friday—there is none.

"Although the Court is ruling on Prop. 8, there is nothing in the order that would lift the 9th CA's stay. So marriage licenses in Calif. will have to wait until this case is decided."

Friday, the Supreme Court also granted a review of Windsor, a challenge to federal Defense of Marriage Act, according to Bloomberg.

DOMA bars the federal government from recognizing the marriages of same-sex couples.

State Attorney General Kamala D. Harris spoke in support of the court's decision to review Prop. 8.

“Today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to consider marriage equality takes our nation one step closer to realizing the American ideal of equal protection under the law for all people,” Harris said in a prepared statement. “For justice to prevail, Proposition 8 must be invalidated so that gay and lesbian families are finally treated with equality and dignity.”

Others echoed her sentiments.

“We are pleased that the court has agreed to decide once and for all whether these blatantly discriminatory marriage bans are permitted under our Constitution,” Ilona Turner, Legal Director of Transgender Law Center in San Francisco said in a prepared statement. “These laws that unconstitutionally restrict access to marriage based solely on gender must be struck down."

Eight other cases involving same-sex marriage were not added to the Supreme Court's "orders list," essentially its docket for the next term. Most involved the Defense of Marriage Act.

It's expected the court will hear the marriage cases in the March sitting, March 18-27.

Jason B December 7, 2012 at 08:56 pm
US Supreme Court to Review Prop. 8 is great news.
Frank Geefay December 8, 2012 at 03:17 am
It is good that the Supreme Court will finally rule one way or another on this issue. Prop. 8 won by a margin of only 2% 4 years ago. Gays are gaining increasingly wider acceptance with time. 20 years ago gays would deny their gender preference. Today they display it in parades and in other the public venues. It is quite possible that Prop. 8 would not pass today. Gays are coming out of the closets everywhere: in the military, in churches and synagogs, and in political offices. It is just a matter of time before same sex marriages also become legitimized. For better or worst society is changing and there is no turning back.
G Man December 8, 2012 at 05:25 pm
I'm going to marry my dog so he can come visit me in the hospital. Who's going to stop me???
John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt December 8, 2012 at 05:42 pm
Flagged for gay-bashing.
John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt December 8, 2012 at 05:43 pm
There weren't pride parades before 1992?
John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt December 8, 2012 at 05:45 pm
My prediction: SCOTUS finds 5-4 that outlawing same-sex marriage violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Kagan, Sotomayor, Breyer, Ginsburg, and Kennedy in the majority.
Jerome J Ghigliotti Jr December 9, 2012 at 03:37 am
Far aside from the merits and feelings on either side, that would be a further deterioration of states and individual rights, a pervasive objective of the "activist" justices who know better than we do what is good for us. The Commerce and Supremacy Clauses of the Constitution were never intended to vest all powers in the federal government. The Tenth Amendment made that emphatically clear. But who needs a Bill of Rights when the "activist" judiciary knows best about everything. Instead of being a "check and balance" of either a runaway executive or legislative branch; the judiciary is accelerating the runaway policies. You have to look at who appointed the justices, and who elected the executives who appointed them. You, not me. Government by one party and one way of thinking seems like a good idea until they come for your rights and there is no one left to defend you. If we do not listen to the wisdom of the story of Pastor Martin Niemöller we will fall victim to a repeat of Nazi Germany.
mcarthur church December 9, 2012 at 08:24 am
if you are gonna let the gays marry your gonna have to let incesterial couples marry also they pay taxes too!!
John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt December 9, 2012 at 05:29 pm
Yes, allowing same sex couples to marry would strip away individual rights and result in a repeat of Nazi Germany. Friend, take your pills, lie down a for a while, then think about what a lunatic you sound like when you say things like that.
John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt December 9, 2012 at 05:31 pm
Also, talk a Con Law class before you start spouting off about federalism and the Constitution. Your remarks betray a profound lack of understanding of the document you're claiming to revere.
Phillip Salfen December 9, 2012 at 06:12 pm
There still are a couple of states (deep south) that allow marriage between first cousins. "Incest" is in the eye of the beholder. Or the laws of the particular state.
Jesse M. December 9, 2012 at 09:53 pm
Poor, poor G Man. Your wife must treat you just awful. That or you operate intellectually, emotionally, and spiritually on the same level as your dog companion. How on earth can you compare the relationship shared between two humans to that of a relationship between a human and an animal or a human and an inanimate thing?
mcarthur church December 9, 2012 at 11:18 pm
the moral code is changing and it's gonna keep changing because of the different desires that dwell in people. Me personally think homosexuality is wrong not just because the bible declares it!(I am a strong Christian) but sciences does to if we look at the anatomy of the body! The body clearly declare that the male was made the woman and vise versa! The problem lyes in the "strange" desires of man!
John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt December 9, 2012 at 11:48 pm
Care to try that in English, now?
mcarthur church December 10, 2012 at 12:17 am
So chris Corbett if I was" born "with a "desire" to have a relationship with an animal or to have a "desire" to have sex with a sibling should it be considered wrong if I was born like that?
Jennifer Squires (Editor) December 10, 2012 at 07:13 pm
Hi everyone, we thank you for your comments. We feel that everyone has had a chance to add their input, so we are now turning off the comment feature for this specific article.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Rosemont Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Cost is $99.00 from WalMart
Sandor June 18, 2013 at 09:11 pm
The three people - look like they are under 20 years old and are either light skinned black - orRead More Hispanic - travel together often around Percival, Firelight and Caldera. They have also stolen a flip-phone - then asked for $20.00 when they returned it.
Guido Bisogno May 26, 2013 at 08:35 pm
The Marks of this world are too blind to facts to bother arguing with. He thinks 4 generation ofRead More welfare and more people on food stamps then ever before in history is progress! What's the point acknowledging such absurd nonsense? Don't bother Roberto, complete waste of effort.
Marnix A. van Ammers May 27, 2013 at 07:21 am
Nobody likes debt or an economy that is limping along. Obama has done an admirable job consideringRead More what he's had to put up with. The deficit has been reduced considerably. Stock market is as high as ever. Unemployment is still a big problem. Thank God we still have food stamps to help those people who have lost their jobs. Our bridges are falling apart. How about we invest in fixing our crumbling infrastructure, get those people back to work, get them spending, stimulate this economy. Oh, that's right, if Obama is for it, the opposition will automatically be against it (even if it's their idea!) .
Guido Bisogno May 27, 2013 at 07:03 pm
Here we go - perfect example of a blind koolaid drinker. Listen to this: "The deficit has beenRead More reduced considerably" REALLY, then why has it doubled in the last few years? What planet are you from? "Thank God we still have food stamps to help those people who have lost their jobs." then "Obama has done an admirable job"....HELLOOOOOO! You can't have it both ways. My god we are lost if this is the mentality that is voting now - totally lost. I wish these types were routed out of the gene pool when things were tough and they would simply perish from stupidity. Now days thing are so easy they thrive and reproduce. Watch in 10 years how GREAT things are, just watch.
Jolinda April 10, 2013 at 02:00 pm
Thanks for a wonderful article Chris! Truly, Cyprus is one of the most magical and beautiful placesRead More on this earth and I hope the current financial challenges are short lived! Again, thanks for a very well written article!
Karen Schmidt May 20, 2013 at 01:42 pm
I'm in need of only 3 more families. It's simple and short; only 3 weeks this summer in RosemontRead More area to host a Spanish student. Won't you join us on this exciting opportunity! We go on fun outings over that 3 week period. Contact: Karen Schmidt, 916-521-3679 June 28 - July 23