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.
I don''t believe, with clear conscience, any member of the highest court in the land could possibly rule against the directive stated in the fourteenth amendment.
I don't believe it will be a split decision at all.
It is clearly a black and white case.
.
Oh Scalia, Thomas, and Alito will without question vote against it, so it will be some type of split decision.
Oh Scalia, Thomas, and Alito will without question vote against it, so it will be some type of split decision.
I am looking forward to reading the dissent - it will be interesting!
They will have to find ways around several precedents -
that marriage to the partner of one's choice is the right of all US citizens (loving)
that the government has no compelling interest in denying marriage rights to same-sex couples (Windsor)
that the 14th amendment requires that basic civil rights don't differ because of a person's state of residence
Okay, say it is a choice. You or no one else have the right to oppress people from what they want to do with their lives (Also known as mind your damn business). No one's committing a crime by getting married.
You need a third option, which is that the Supreme Court will rule that it is up to the states to make this determination, which is the Federalist position, and basically the status quo that was in effect before the left began filing suits in the courts of leftist judges with a view towards stacking up favorable rulings without any negative ones.
This third option is the most likely, partisan leftist "experts" opinions on the subject notwithstanding.
Under that ruling, some states will have it, and some states won't.
You need a third option, which is that the Supreme Court will rule that it is up to the states to make this determination, which is the Federalist position, and basically the status quo that was in effect before the left began filing suits in the courts of leftist judges with a view towards stacking up favorable rulings without any negative ones.
This third option is the most likely, partisan leftist "experts" opinions on the subject notwithstanding.
Under that ruling, some states will have it, and some states won't.
The only answer to make sense. SCOTUS has no opinion on this as it is not in the Constitution. The topic comes under 10A. Read the Constitution and see for yourselves. Most of the idiocy liberals bring before SCOTUS is not their's to decide - they should adhere to the law of the land. However, SCOTUS is loaded with left leaning weenies who have no business on a bench in any court of law - maybe a TV show, for the hilarity of it all - so liberals will drag anything under the sun before them until they die off. The conservative robes are worse than the liberal. We know how a liberal robe will rule; not so with a "conservative'' contemporary.
The only answer to make sense. SCOTUS has no opinion on this as it is not in the Constitution. The topic comes under 10A. Read the Constitution and see for yourselves. Most of the idiocy liberals bring before SCOTUS is not their's to decide - they should adhere to the law of the land. However, SCOTUS is loaded with left leaning weenies who have no business on a bench in any court of law - maybe a TV show, for the hilarity of it all - so liberals will drag anything under the sun before them until they die off. The conservative robes are worse than the liberal. We know how a liberal robe will rule; not so with a "conservative'' contemporary.
The topic comes under 14a. Read the Constitution and see for yourself.
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.
