Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Fortunately it is, precisely, that simple. That's entirely the point of the system of Common Law that American jurisprudence is based on. Specifically, in this case, the concept of vertical stare decisis. As a subordinate court to the 4th Circuit, Judge Childs is bound to follow the ruling made by the 4th in Bostic, just as Judges Cogburn and Osteen in the Western and Middle Districts of North Carolina were bound when they made their rulings this past week in General Synod of the United Church of Christ v. Cooper, Fisher-Borne v. Smith, and Gerber and Berlin v. Cooper.
Beyond that, let's assume for some reason Judge Childs went off the rails and found in favor of the defendants here. The plaintiffs will then appeal to the 4th Circuit who'll overturn Childs' ruling faster than you can say "Oyez" precisely because they just ruled on this matter. I think the decision Childs has before her is much more simple - whether to simply rule in favor of the Plaintiffs or allow Haley and Wilson to grandstand and pander in her courtroom.
In reading the attached article, I was confused near the beginning where it says Judge Childs may rule as early as this week. Then it dawned on me, and I hope I'm correct, that she told both sides to submit their briefs next week (She had originally said by today.) in case she decides to hold a hearing, but that she could decide this week to not hold a hearing and go ahead and issue her decision, which would be a rubber stamp of the 4th Circuit Court's ruling. Please, someone correct me if I'm wrong. And if I'm right please say I'm right.
It'll be a while, maybe quite a while if some loop hole throws a wrench in the spokes...
Unfortunately, the politicians will continue to seek out ways to extend the ban. After NC's Attorney General stated he would not pursue appeals and ordered counties to issue licenses, a judge has allowed two Republican politicians to intervene in the appeals process. Since the Supreme Court did not actually issue a definitive ruling, the door remains open for these politicians to appeal all the way thru the federal courts, and ultimately back to the Supreme Court. Whether any lower court would grant a stay during this lengthy process is anybody's guess. Once again, our politicians are hard at work protecting the world from equality.
Unfortunately, the politicians will continue to seek out ways to extend the ban. After NC's Attorney General stated he would not pursue appeals and ordered counties to issue licenses, a judge has allowed two Republican politicians to intervene in the appeals process. Since the Supreme Court did not actually issue a definitive ruling, the door remains open for these politicians to appeal all the way thru the federal courts, and ultimately back to the Supreme Court. Whether any lower court would grant a stay during this lengthy process is anybody's guess. Once again, our politicians are hard at work protecting the world from equality.
More aptly, the gate's open, but there's likely not anyone home. Judge Osteen dismissed Fisher-Borne and Gerber and Berlin in the same breath he allowed Tillis and Berger (NC's Speaker of the House and Senate President Pro Tempore) to intervene. If they do intervene, it's to the 4th - which has already issued a guiding ruling on this in the form of Bostic. If they then appeal again, it goes to SCOTUS, who've said they're not going to hear any cases coming out of several circuits, including the 4th. So they can appeal, they can grandstand, but there's not much else they can do in the interim.
...So they can appeal, they can grandstand, but there's not much else they can do in the interim.
Except delay, delay, delay.... I hear ya', and I hope you're right. My concern is how politicized the Supreme Court has become, and in a real sense they have not ruled on this issue; they simply declined to hear the appeals, thereby upholding the lower courts' ruling. I think the great hope of the evangelical right is that with enough delays, the Court will be required to rule, and could very well determine the issue falls within the authority of individual states to set these guidelines. IMO, that would be a horribly incorrect ruling, but my expectations of the current Supreme Court are pretty low.
More aptly, the gate's open, but there's likely not anyone home. Judge Osteen dismissed Fisher-Borne and Gerber and Berlin in the same breath he allowed Tillis and Berger (NC's Speaker of the House and Senate President Pro Tempore) to intervene. If they do intervene, it's to the 4th - which has already issued a guiding ruling on this in the form of Bostic. If they then appeal again, it goes to SCOTUS, who've said they're not going to hear any cases coming out of several circuits, including the 4th. So they can appeal, they can grandstand, but there's not much else they can do in the interim.
Did SCOTUS ever say it won't take it up or did it just avoid the issue so far by not taking it up?
Alan Wilson has a law degree. He knows how the judicial system works. He knows that the result of Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in the Virginia case has rendered same-sex prohibitions unconstitutional through the entire Fourth Circuit, which includes South Carolina. He knows there is precisely zero chance of prevailing, because it's over.
But he's going to spend money and he's going to pretend like 'there's a chance' because he's pandering to ignorant voters that don't know any better. And the fact that he's hurting people by denying them their rights does not matter one bit to him.
He's a shameful embarrassment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Columbiadata
Did SCOTUS ever say it won't take it up or did it just avoid the issue so far by not taking it up?
What the United States Supreme Court has done is simply to deny cert in cases out of the Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Circuits. They did so with no comment. We don't even know how the vote went (except that, since it takes four or more votes to grant cert, in each of those cases there were at most three votes in favor of hearing them). They certainly have not said they will not hear any similar appeals.
Presumably, when there is a circuit split they'll ultimately agree to hear the appeal. A decision in the Sixth Circuit (Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee) is due any time, but it's likely to be another ruling upholding lower court decision to over turn bans. There's also a case percolating in the Fifth Circuit, but since it hasn't even been briefed yet there's little chance a decision will come in time for the USSC to hear an appeal before the next term (which begins October 2015).
Given the fact that the issue is almost guaranteed to be heading to the Supreme Court now, it probably would have been better to issue a stay at this juncture. But whatever. Either way, the Supreme Court will have to take up the issue now since there are finally conflicting rulings. After that, it should be settled one way or the other definitively.
I don't think the Supreme Court will have a majority willing to take back the right to marry.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
