g********d
发帖数: 4174 | 1 Until Tuesday, it looked like California's Proposition 8 gay marriage case
would be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. But that looks less certain now.
The narrow California-only approach adopted by the 9th Circuit means the
high court might choose to steer clear of the dispute.
If so, that would leave for another day — perhaps several years in the
future — a national ruling on same-sex marriage.
FULL COVERAGE: Prop. 8
"The opinion holds that Prop. 8 was unconstitutional only in a case where
the state had already granted full legal rights to same-sex couples," said
University of Minnesota law school professor Dale Carpenter.
The decision "is specifically looking at the role of Proposition 8 in the
California context," said Santa Clara University law professor Margaret M.
Russell. Because it is limited to California, the Supreme Court may not be
as concerned about reviewing it as it would a ruling that would have
affected the entire country, she said.
Several state courts have struck down bans on same-sex marriage based on
their state constitutions, but the U.S. Supreme Court has not ruled on
whether such a ban denies gays and lesbians the "equal protection of the
laws" under the 14th Amendment.
Indeed, the 9th Circuit's opinion reads as though its intended audience was
one -- Justice Anthony Kennedy -- and its message was that there was no need
for the Supreme Court to decide the California case.
Appeals court judge Stephen Reinhardt, a staunch liberal, did not say gays
and lesbians have an equal right to marry under the Constitution. Instead,
he said California's voters violated the Constitution by "taking away from
them alone" the right they had won to marry under a state Supreme Court
decision.
His opinion relies almost entirely on a 1996 opinion written by Justice
Kennedy, the court's crucial swing vote.
That case arose when Colorado's voters adopted a state initiative that
voided a series of local ordinances and state laws that protected gays and
lesbians from discrimination based on sexual orientation. At that time, the
high court had never ruled in favor of gays on a discrimination claim.
But in Romer vs. Evans, Justice Kennedy wrote a strong opinion saying the
Colorado law was unconstitutional because it singled out gays and lesbians
for unfair treatment and took away their hard-won legal rights. Kennedy did
not say, however, that states must adopt gay rights laws.
Reinhardt's opinion repeatedly cites Kennedy's opinion. "Prop. 8 singles out
same-sex couples for unequal treatment by taking away from them alone the
right to marry," he said, including one of many citations to Romer vs. Evans.
The defenders of Prop. 8 have 90 days to appeal this decision directly to
the Supreme Court and ask the justices to review it. But to win, they almost
certainly would need the vote of Justice Kennedy.
The court's four conservatives — Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and
Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito — could vote to
hear the case. It takes only four votes to hear an appeal. But it takes five
to have a majority.
Douglas NeJaime, a Loyola Law School professor of sexual orientation law,
agreed that the ruling was written for Kennedy, but suggested that if the
Supreme Court did take up the case, Kennedy could side with the four liberal
justices to "find Proposition 8 unconstitutional without having to
significantly expand their jurisprudence" -- meaning that it wouldn't have
any effect on other states' gay marriage bans.
Alliance Defense Fund attorney Brian Raum said the Proposition 8 supporters
hadn't yet decided whether to ask that a full 11-judge panel of the 9th
Circuit reconsider the case or take their request for review and reversal
directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The justices in Washington accept only about 1% of the cases appealed to
them each year. Analysts were divided over whether the high court would
grant review of the Proposition 8 ruling, with some saying the time is ripe
for the justices to weigh in on whether there is a constitutional right to
marry a same-sex partner and others seeing the 9th Circuit ruling as so
narrowly tailored to the California case as to require no review.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/02/prop-8-supreme-co | L*******e
发帖数: 2202 | 2 6月5日，关于美国加州8号提案的联邦法院诉讼有了新发展，在旧金山的联邦第9上诉庭
拒绝了8号提案支持团体提出的由11名法官重审本案的要求，即维持今年2月上诉庭3名
法官作出的8号提案违宪的裁决。下一步也是最后一步，反同性婚姻团体预料将把本案
上诉到美国最高法院。 | k*****e
发帖数: 22013 | 3 刚刚在电视上看到。
高院不受理的话，就把撤销prop8的影响力限制在加州，不波及全国。
now.
【在 g********d 的大作中提到】
: Until Tuesday, it looked like California's Proposition 8 gay marriage case
: would be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. But that looks less certain now.
: The narrow California-only approach adopted by the 9th Circuit means the
: high court might choose to steer clear of the dispute.
: If so, that would leave for another day — perhaps several years in the
: future — a national ruling on same-sex marriage.
: FULL COVERAGE: Prop. 8
: "The opinion holds that Prop. 8 was unconstitutional only in a case where
: the state had already granted full legal rights to same-sex couples," said
: University of Minnesota law school professor Dale Carpenter.
| p****u
发帖数: 2596 | 4 我觉得高院不回受理这个案子。。但是会受理doma案子。
不理解媒体为啥关注doma的比关注prop８的多。
now.
【在 g********d 的大作中提到】
: Until Tuesday, it looked like California's Proposition 8 gay marriage case
: would be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. But that looks less certain now.
: The narrow California-only approach adopted by the 9th Circuit means the
: high court might choose to steer clear of the dispute.
: If so, that would leave for another day — perhaps several years in the
: future — a national ruling on same-sex marriage.
: FULL COVERAGE: Prop. 8
: "The opinion holds that Prop. 8 was unconstitutional only in a case where
: the state had already granted full legal rights to same-sex couples," said
: University of Minnesota law school professor Dale Carpenter.
| t*******e
发帖数: 2113 | 5
DOMA是聯邦法，影響是全國的。
Prop8只影響加州。
【在 p****u 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得高院不回受理这个案子。。但是会受理doma案子。
: 不理解媒体为啥关注doma的比关注prop８的多。
:
: now.
| p****u
发帖数: 2596 | 6 刚打说错了， 不理解媒体为啥关注prop８的比关注doma的多。
【在 t*******e 的大作中提到】
:
: DOMA是聯邦法，影響是全國的。
: Prop8只影響加州。
| L*******e
发帖数: 2202 | 7 prop 8 打赢了就全美允许同婚了？ 相对争议比较大吧。
【在 p****u 的大作中提到】
: 刚打说错了， 不理解媒体为啥关注prop８的比关注doma的多。
|
|
