Full Version: Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional
In Today's news:
"In the first time that a federal judge has struck down a state constitutional provision limiting marriage to heterosexual couples, U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon on Thursday declared void a provision of the Nebraska constitution that defined marriage as only between a man and a woman and that banned same-sex civil unions, domestic partnerships and other similar relationships."
Full MSNBC Story
I would like to avoid the questions of if gay marriage itself is right or wrong, and have this discussion focus more on questions of the potential results of this decision on future policy.
The questions I would like to discuss are:
1) Do you believe that this ruling will get overturned by the US Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court? Please state why.
2) Based on your first answer, what will this mean for gay marriage going forward? Will an overturning effectively halt the push for gay marriage? Will a affirmation of this ruling be the final word, allowing gay marriage through the US? Do you think this will ultimately lead to a Constitutional amendment banning such marriage, and would such an amendment pass?
3) What political ramifications will this have? Will such a ruling play a significant part in the 2006 congressional elections?
"In the first time that a federal judge has struck down a state constitutional provision limiting marriage to heterosexual couples, U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon on Thursday declared void a provision of the Nebraska constitution that defined marriage as only between a man and a woman and that banned same-sex civil unions, domestic partnerships and other similar relationships."
Full MSNBC Story
I would like to avoid the questions of if gay marriage itself is right or wrong, and have this discussion focus more on questions of the potential results of this decision on future policy.
The questions I would like to discuss are:
1) Do you believe that this ruling will get overturned by the US Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court? Please state why.
2) Based on your first answer, what will this mean for gay marriage going forward? Will an overturning effectively halt the push for gay marriage? Will a affirmation of this ruling be the final word, allowing gay marriage through the US? Do you think this will ultimately lead to a Constitutional amendment banning such marriage, and would such an amendment pass?
3) What political ramifications will this have? Will such a ruling play a significant part in the 2006 congressional elections?
1) Do you believe that this ruling will get overturned by the US Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court? Please state why.
No. This ruling is so heavily based on Romer v. Evans that the US Supreme Court would effectively overturn that ruling in overturning this one. I don't think that is likely.
2) Based on your first answer, what will this mean for gay marriage going forward? Will an overturning effectively halt the push for gay marriage? Will a affirmation of this ruling be the final word, allowing gay marriage through the US? Do you think this will ultimately lead to a Constitutional amendment banning such marriage, and would such an amendment pass?
This case does not necessarily prohibit the legislation from enacting laws banning same-sex marriage. It will, most likely, have an effect on other similarly worded state DOMA's.
3) What political ramifications will this have? Will such a ruling play a significant part in the 2006 congressional elections?
Difficult to tell. The important question is what effect will this have on a Federal Marriage Amendment. One of the principal reasons for the Amendment's failure was that there hadn't been a successful challenge to State Marriage Amendments.
No. This ruling is so heavily based on Romer v. Evans that the US Supreme Court would effectively overturn that ruling in overturning this one. I don't think that is likely.
QUOTE
ACLU, et al v. Bruning (2005)
Section 29 goes so far beyond defining marriage that the court can only conclude that the intent and purpose of the amendment is based on animus against this class ["This class", meaning homosexuals].
Section 29 goes so far beyond defining marriage that the court can only conclude that the intent and purpose of the amendment is based on animus against this class ["This class", meaning homosexuals].
2) Based on your first answer, what will this mean for gay marriage going forward? Will an overturning effectively halt the push for gay marriage? Will a affirmation of this ruling be the final word, allowing gay marriage through the US? Do you think this will ultimately lead to a Constitutional amendment banning such marriage, and would such an amendment pass?
This case does not necessarily prohibit the legislation from enacting laws banning same-sex marriage. It will, most likely, have an effect on other similarly worded state DOMA's.
3) What political ramifications will this have? Will such a ruling play a significant part in the 2006 congressional elections?
Difficult to tell. The important question is what effect will this have on a Federal Marriage Amendment. One of the principal reasons for the Amendment's failure was that there hadn't been a successful challenge to State Marriage Amendments.
Topic closed...
Reason: Duplicate topic.
Recommended action:
Please use the search feature to locate a similar topic. If you are unable to find a similar topic, please contact the staff member who closed the topic by clicking the PM button below this post.
Helpful links:
- Simple Search
- Advanced Search
- Starting New Topics
- Survival Guide
- The Rules
- Staff Directory
Note: This is an automated response.
Most of this is being discussed here: Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional, California repeals same-sex marriage ban
If you'd like to reshape this debate to be specifically about this ruling, please PM a staff member with your revised question.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.