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.
Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court met in conference to review numerous petitions. On their docket was Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Proposition 8 case. The current status of the case is that the Ninth Circuit has ruled unconstitutuional the revoking of same-sex marriage rights once granted. This morning the USSC has released the list of cases reviewed yesterday that it will hear in its upcoming session. Hollingsworth v. Perry is not on the list. http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/c...2512zr5bc9.pdf
This means one of two things:
The USSC has denied cert (denials of cert are expected to be released next Monday, October 1st); or
The USSC is re-listing the case for further consideration later in the term, at which point the petition will again be reviewed
If cert is denied, the Ninth Circuit's ruling becomes binding law throughout the Ninth, though at this point it would apply to circumstances that have only occurred in California.
Well...that's how it works. The Supreme Court has discretion over what cases they will, or will not, hear. Usually, they base that upon some discord among lower court rulings or important issues they want to address.
Well...that's how it works. The Supreme Court has discretion over what cases they will, or will not, hear. Usually, they base that upon some discord among lower court rulings or important issues they want to address.
Actually, declining to hear this case (which seems to be the most likely outcome at this point) will create some lower court 'discord' -- specifically, a circuit split, where precedent is set but only legally applicable to the states in the Ninth Circuit. However, it will be fairly minor, on a practical basis.
I suspect this issue is indeed one the USSC will seek to adjudicate at some point in the relatively near future, but this just isn't the ideal case for that. However, there are several cases in their early stages in the federal court system that could well arrive at the high court within two to three years.
Actually, declining to hear this case (which seems to be the most likely outcome at this point) will create some lower court 'discord' -- specifically, a circuit split, where precedent is set but only legally applicable to the states in the Ninth Circuit. However, it will be fairly minor, on a practical basis.
How can it produce lower court discord when only the 9th has ruled on this particular issue? If fact, the 9th is the ONLY Circuit Court which can as it pertains to a California law, which is under their jurisdiction.
How can it produce lower court discord when only the 9th has ruled on this particular issue? If fact, the 9th is the ONLY Circuit Court which can as it pertains to a California law, which is under their jurisdiction.
If the USSC declines to hear this case, the Ninth's ruling will become binding Constitutional law in eight states and two territories. There will be no such binding Constitutional law in the other forty-two states and several other non-state regions. Thus, there will be discord between the Ninth Circuit and the rest of the circuit courts of appeals.
As I noted, this is not a big deal due to the very narrow grounds of the ruling by the Ninth. Compare this to the DOMA cases, where a circuit split would be so problematic that the USSC simply will not allow it to happen -- they are all but certain to hear a DOMA appeal of some sort this term.
If cert is denied, the Ninth Circuit's ruling becomes binding law throughout the Ninth, though at this point it would apply to circumstances that have only occurred in California.
Which is likely why the Supremes didn't grant cert. The people who put together the case to try to overrule the will of California voters, very carefully made it a California-only case, with no issues that could affect other states.
The good news is, this will mean that when (not if) other states bring similar cases, the Calif ruling will not create a precedent.
Which is likely why the Supremes didn't grant cert. The people who put together the case to try to overrule the will of California voters, very carefully made it a California-only case, with no issues that could affect other states.
They did nothing of the sort.
The "people who put together the case" (David Boise and former Solicitor General under President George W. Bush, Ted Olson) argued that bans on same-sex marriage are entirely unconstitutional. They used the Prop 8 appeal as a vehicle for overturning same-sex marriage bans nationwide, and were quite public in doing so in numerous comments and interviews. It was the Ninth Circuit that narrowed the scope of the District Court's ruling.
Quote:
The good news is, this will mean that when (not if) other states bring similar cases, the Calif ruling will not create a precedent.
Not quite. If cert is denied, this case will create binding precedent throughout the Ninth. For example, if Washington (which is within the Ninth) legalizes same-sex marriage in November (and they are likely to do so), then this ruling applies to them; they will be prohibited from ever repealing their same-sex marriage law. Of course, it will also be binding on any future states in the Ninth when the enact laws allowing same-sex marriage (the likeliest candidates seem to be Hawai'i and Nevada, in that order).
And while there will be no legally binding precedent, you can be assured that other courts will take note of the fact that the USSC permitted another district court to enact such a ruling. Courts often use rulings to which they are not stricly bound as guidance.
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.
