Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Equality news round-up: Fifth Circuit news, and more

LGBT Legal Cases Marriage equality Marriage Equality Trials

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals– In Georgia, the plaintiffs who filed the class-action challenge to the state’s marriage ban have told the district court about the Supreme Court’s actions denying review in seven marriage petitions, pointing out that Baker v. Nelson likely is irrelevant.

– The plaintiffs challenging Ohio’s ban in the Sixth Circuit have likewise pointed to the Court’s actions as being helpful to their position.

– In the Fifth Circuit, the plaintiffs challenging Texas’ ban are requesting a hearing at the earliest possible time.

– SCOTUSBlog has two posts (here and here) on what the Court’s actions may signal for marriage equality.

– This morning, the Seventh Circuit issued its mandate in the Indiana and Wisconsin marriage cases. This was the final action needed to make those cases binding. Yesterday, the Fourth and Tenth Circuits issued the mandate in their cases.

– Lambda Legal is joining the legal team arguing in the Fifth Circuit that Louisiana’s same-sex marriage ban is unconstitutional.

Thanks to Equality Case Files for these filings


  • 1. ragefirewolf  |  October 7, 2014 at 8:03 am

    Woohoo! Go Seventh and thank you, Judge Posner and company!!

  • 2. ragefirewolf  |  October 7, 2014 at 8:22 am

    I always appreciate the SCOTUSBlog analyses (especially those by Lyle), and I am optimistic that a doomsday scenario of SCOTUS upholding a state ban after denying review to seven appeals will not happen.

  • 3. DACiowan  |  October 7, 2014 at 8:25 am

    The next domino is in sight: AG Suthers in Colorado has asked the 10th Circuit to dismiss his appeal of Burns v. Hickenlooper (the Federal District case), and to lift the stay. If that happens today, Colorado becomes state #25.


  • 4. buckybear0310b  |  October 7, 2014 at 8:42 am

    Also…since my husband were #27 in Milwaukee County on that day, there is a case to force its recognition that was filed 9/17…thoughts on that potential disposition because of the declaratory judgment by Judge Crabb?

  • 5. ragefirewolf  |  October 7, 2014 at 9:13 am

    I feel like everyone here has forgotten about Puerto Rico, which is in the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals…does anyone have an update on Conde v. Padilla?

  • 6. DoctorHeimlich  |  October 7, 2014 at 9:16 am

    Things moving along quickly in Colorado…

    Colorado Supreme Court lifts injunctions against 3 clerks involving same-sex marriage licenses

  • 7. DACiowan  |  October 7, 2014 at 9:18 am

    A Christian group filed a request (technically a reply to opposition to intervention) to argue for the ban. Their argument is basically "Lookee Louisiana." Equality Case Files has the PDF.

  • 8. ragefirewolf  |  October 7, 2014 at 9:19 am


  • 9. DACiowan  |  October 7, 2014 at 9:20 am

    Wiki map already updated before I could get to it. 😀

    Also, Colorado is state #25. The halfway state!

  • 10. guitaristbl  |  October 7, 2014 at 9:26 am

    So the Ohio plaintiffs are shouting it to Sutton in case he didn't notice (I am sure he did before that of course..). He must be having a very hard time. He was hopeful that SCOTUS will get this issue out of his hands and suddenly it puts him even more in the spotlight. I don't know what he will do now or if he will re think the issue once again. Every single thing that could influence his decision since oral arguments (Posner's decision, SCOTUS rejection) is pointing to the direction of ME. I wouldn't like to be in his shoes right now honestly.

    As for the 5th, I thought they were urging a hearing based on yesterday's events but they do on quite different grounds, pointing the legal urgency given that one of the couples expects a 2nd child. I doubt it will work on legal or even human grounds in the 5th but it's about time they set a hearing and finally expedite if the 6th rules in favour of ME.

    I hope things proceed quickly in the 11th as well. We should expect a favourable decision there, unless the plaintiffs are SO unlucky to get a bigoted panel in a court full of Obama appointees.

  • 11. SethInMaryland  |  October 7, 2014 at 9:47 am

    i think sulton is going to break , he's going to have change of heart, and find a way to strike down the bans, he is not the one the one who wants to be the one that looked at as goes to supreme court

  • 12. RobW303  |  October 7, 2014 at 9:55 am

    Marriage equality is now a done deal in Colorado, the 25th state won: the Colorado Supreme Court has lifted its stays, dismissing the Brinkman appeal at the request of both sides, and AG Suthers directed that clerks in all counties should begin issuing licenses to same-sex couples.

  • 13. RobW303  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:06 am

    "Blue Skies" just became my favorite song.

  • 14. guitaristbl  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:07 am

    Colorado clerks are instructed by AG to issue marriage licenses after Colorado SC dismissed the appeal :

    So yeah that's it. 25 it is and we are halfway there as we wait for the procedural things in NC,SC,WV,WY,KS.

  • 15. DACiowan  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:11 am

    Another significant part of the Colorado ruling is that it leaves Nevada as the only state with civil unions but not marriage. As soon as the Ninth Circuit rules for us, the eight state solution will be history.

  • 16. Waxr  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:18 am

    Meaning you do not see fire and brimstone falling from the sky.

  • 17. SethInMaryland  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:33 am

    hmm, this may be the end of civil unions in the us

  • 18. Ragavendran  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:35 am

    Also, PACER shows that Tenth Circuit Judges Ebel and Hartz have just dissolved the stay in the federal case, Burns.

  • 19. StraightDave  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:36 am

    The OH plaintiffs' filing today gives us the latest scorecard, well beyond the tipping point:

    "The decision not to hear these cases brings or will bring (after additional legal filings) the total percentage of Americans living in states that, according to majority vote or binding legal precedent, allow marriage between same-sex couples to 60.14%"

    Seems like it was just weeks ago we were arguing about whether it was 27% or 29%.
    Oct 6, 2014 may be long remembered as the day the house of cards collapsed. There's still a lot of sweeping up to do, but it's very much a one-way street now. The.Doubt.Is.Gone.

  • 20. flyerguy77  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:39 am

    Wow– The New Civil Right Movement Facebook page is misleading and lying to their "readers/ followers" They are saying other states besides the 6 states are refusing to issue marriage licenses. They don't need to follow a District Circuit Appeal Court decision until they are ordered otherwise from a lower court. They even tried to say "Oklahoma is not issuing marriage licenses. Gov Fallin disagrees with the lack of decision by the SCOTUS- She will be singing a different tune if they decided to take the case and ruled in the states' favor Thats not true at all, they are issuing marriage licenses…

  • 21. ragefirewolf  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:40 am

    But nothing more than that has happened? I was looking for a little more detail than that…

  • 22. Mike_Baltimore  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:43 am

    Since fire and brimstone hasn't occurred in Massachusetts in more than 10 years of ME, nor in any of the other 19 jurisdictions (18 states and D.C.) since then until yesterday, I'm very doubtful that fire and brimstone will fall in any of the states with or without ME.

    What does that say about the 'predictions' of the religious right about what their god thinks of ME?

  • 23. guitaristbl  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:43 am

    When in the 90s, early 2000s they were suggested as a middle ground from democrats and civil rights groups, the republicans arrogantly rejected them. Karma is a bitch after all…

  • 24. StraightDave  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:47 am

    I never thought Sutton's heart was all that hard, he just came from a different place and had an uncomfortable time moving into the future or doing so via the courts. SCOTUS just gave him the legal escape hatch he needed so he didn't have to agonize about the appropriateness of a judicial decision (my reading of his main sticking point) or the social blowback. He should be relieved to be off the hook of being "the decider". How easy to now cite 3 other circuits that have implicitly been blessed by SCOTUS! His duty is done, his conscience clear, his respect for Posner intact. He won't write it, but he'll concur.

  • 25. Ragavendran  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:48 am

    Hmmm… I don't see any contradicting information in the article their FB page links to:

  • 26. Ragavendran  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:53 am

    Nobody wants to be the judge to be overturned by the Supreme Court. And by denying cert to all petitions yesterday, the Supreme Court has made it very clear that the ball is in Sutton's court now, and even clearer that if they step in, it would only be to overturn in favor of gay rights. I wonder how far along he is in his writing.

  • 27. Ragavendran  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:54 am

    The Sixth Circuit today released an opinion by Daughtrey, almost a year after argument. I hope she doesn't take that long in our cases!!!

  • 28. StraightDave  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:56 am

    His only angst might come from crawling back to the majority author and saying "Oops! I know the ink is almost dry but I changed my mind". But he won't regret it.

  • 29. guitaristbl  |  October 7, 2014 at 10:57 am

    And on other news the 6th today issued an opinion (written by Daughtrey btw) argued on November 20, 2013…Coincidentally it was 2 months yesterday since the 6th heard arguments. I don't know wha "expedite the appeal" means in the 6th but we should be getting an opinion either this week or the next.

  • 30. RLsfba  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:01 am

    The new Utah spin on marriage – "pairage" – and they are going to dig in their heels. Gird our loins we must and we will get to ME nationwide, but the very red states will put up as many obstacles as possible. Hopefully Sen. Jim Dabakis will have some say. And then there's Ted Cruz….

  • 31. Roulette00  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:02 am

    Oh, in six months or so, you'll see a tornado or something in Oklahoma, and a giant sign from a donut shop will topple over into a church and crush a priest's favorite massive organ. Some fundie lackwit will crow that "it was them gays, with all their love and marriage" and God is sending a sign. Just you wait.

  • 32. samg68  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:03 am

    I hope not, we want the 9th to rule first so idaho's appeal can be rejected too.

  • 33. guitaristbl  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:05 am

    Cruz, well on his way to get the vote of religious conservatives on the 2016 primaries, is threatening to introduce the usual bigoted stuff to the senate :

    If this man ever becomes president of any country, I propose automatic granting of asylum to the residents of this country.

  • 34. DACiowan  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:07 am

    I wonder what is tying up the 9th, since it's been a month tomorrow since arguments. Deciding standing issues with Hawaii? Or am I just spoiled from the 7th Circuit?

  • 35. StraightDave  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:08 am

    Anybody know what the deal is with FL?
    In… FL is uniquely light blue and footnote 3 says " A ruling striking down Florida's same-sex marriage ban goes will remain in effect for 91 days after cert was denied in similar cases on October 6, 2014."

    Ignoring the botched editing and grammar, is there some 91-day clock ticking that I missed? Or is that the deadline for an appeal that we know won't happen now?

  • 36. DACiowan  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:12 am

    In the ruling, the judge wrote: "The preliminary injunctions set out in paragraphs 4 and 6 are stayed and will not take effect until 91 days after stays have been denied or lifted in Bostic v. Schaefer, [etc.] The stay may be lifted or extended by further order."

    Page 32 of

    I also fixed the grammar; typical Wikipedia.

  • 37. SethInMaryland  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:17 am

    if we do win sulton over and win the 6th , that will leave only leave left with diffcult 5th for the time being , what would judges would we need fore a lottery win for us in the 5th?

  • 38. JayJonson  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:19 am

    I wish I was quite so confident as you, StraightDave. Alas, I expect some bumps along the way. I do take comfort from the fact that it will be very difficult for SCOTUS to rule in a way that would restore the marriage bans in states where people are already getting married. But I think it may be a couple of years before we have marriage equality nationwide. And should a Republican be elected President in 2016, I would not be surprised if he or she makes several very conservative SCOTUS appointments.

  • 39. guitaristbl  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:19 am

    If the 6th rules against, SCOTUS takes the case and somehow rules against ME, then it won't matter if Idaho gets it now along with the ones that got it yesterday, since those decisions will be overturned when the states take new legal action.

    So whatever is to happen, let's let it happen. And we still don't know how the 6th will rule. Sutton may have got a message.

  • 40. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:20 am

    Hello, Iowan: I love your state; it's where I got married. :-)

    The ACLU says they will ask the judge (US District Judge Robert Hinkle) to lift the stay.

    Bondi says she's waiting on the other courts of appeal to decide whether or not she'll pull out:….

  • 41. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:21 am

    No published opinions from the 9th at all today.

  • 42. ragefirewolf  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:21 am

    Very interesting instructions…

    I wonder what precedence there is for a federal judge to base his stay orders on the results from an Appeals Circuit his court isn't in. I'm of course specifically talking about the stay orders, not being persuaded in ruling a certain way by the decisions in another Circuit.

  • 43. sfbob  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:21 am

    "One state legislator is already thinking about making a distinction between same-sex marriages and other marriages in adoption cases. Rep. Kraig Powell Monday raised the question of the parental rights of a biological father when the mother is in a same-sex marriage, and he brought up the term "pairage" as a possible way to distinguish between the same-sex and opposite-sex marriage."

    To which one can only respond, "Yeah, good luck with that."

  • 44. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:23 am

    My goodness. This "pairage" business is just crazy. They can't create a different status for us; Utah will be embroiled in yet another federal lawsuit.

  • 45. SethInMaryland  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:24 am

    i think Bondi is looking for for a way out , the supreme court just gave her a way out , she should take it

  • 46. guitaristbl  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:24 am

    Don't they have anything better to do ? Like really…The questions he poses may be answered by looking at what's on effect for infertile couples who go through adoption or surrogacy, or by simply looking at the laws in effect in ME states before yesterday's decision.

    The whole "pairage" thing is ridiculous and won't stand in any court anyway. They'd better focus on other things and let ME alone. Forever.

  • 47. Ragavendran  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:25 am

    We must have been posting simultaneously the same thing!

  • 48. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:25 am

    I wonder this, too!

  • 49. JayJonson  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:28 am

    I wonder if there really is much onus attached to being overturned by SCOTUS? Does anyone have any evidence of this?

    I can see how some appellate judges on both sides of the ideological spectrum might wear their having been overturned on particular issues as a badge of honor. A lot of SCOTUS judges are more famous for their dissents than for their controlling opinions. (I wish, for example, that Justice Blackmun could have lived to see his powerful dissent in Hardwick become validated by Lawrence just four years after he died.)

    In any case, does being overruled by SCOTUS have negative consequences for appellate judges? Any examples of an appellate judge suffering as a result of having a ruling reversed?

  • 50. Ragavendran  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:29 am

    Could you please repost the link? It doesn't take me anywhere…

  • 51. SethInMaryland  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:30 am

    when is the next time opinions might come out for the 9th

  • 52. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:32 am

    flyerguy and Rav are both correct, really. The New Republic article suggests that marriage equality is the law in 30 states, and it is not. Yes, the Circuit decisions are precedent for all of the states within a particular circuit. However, state governments are not required to follow the precedent until ordered to do so by a federal judge. Many choose to follow the precedent of their own volition; apparently, Sam Brownback from Kansas did not so choose.

  • 53. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:34 am

    Sorry all –

  • 54. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:35 am

    Unpublished opinions are generally released on their website by 1 p.m. Pacific each day. Published opinions – by 10 a.m. each day.

    IANAL – But, I think unpublished opinions do not have the force of published opinions in that they are not mean to set precedent within the circuit.

  • 55. Margo Schulter  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:37 am

    What I’m getting from the New Civil Rights Movement page is that South Carolina, for example, is going to play out more litigation to the bitter end rather than accept that the Fourth Circuit has set governing precedent. In short, it’s at least close to a frivolous exercise to go through the formalities of defending the South Carolina ban in the federal courts when we already know the result. It seems that some elected officials want to be able to say, “We fought marriage equality as best we could.”

  • 56. Ragavendran  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:42 am

    I don't think there are any material negative consequences for being overturned, e.g., salaries :)

    But what I said is from what I've heard in many articles, and the general wisdom, e.g., Judge Posner thinks it is "humiliating" to be reversed by the Supreme Court; see towards the end of the video:

    Absent some new development or precedent, a reversal, in general, would mean that the appellate court did not apply the law "correctly" in the view of the Supreme Court. And I'd think being told you're wrong would hurt to some extent. At least, I'd feel that way!

  • 57. Ragavendran  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:45 am


  • 58. RLsfba  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:47 am

    They can't but they may try. They didn't spend much on their appeal to SCOTUS since they won't have to provide anything more, or prep or oral arguments, so they have taxpayer money to put to another court case hoping they'll find some logic that warms Scalito's heart. I agree with "Yeah, Good luck with that" but they'll still try it.

  • 59. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:55 am

    Even South Carolina's Attorney General and Governor are saying they will continue their lawsuit.

  • 60. jdw_karasu  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:56 am

    The potential bumps are:

    Arkansas (8th)
    Louisiana (5th)
    Mississippi (5th)
    Missouri (8th)
    Nebraska (8th)
    North Dakota (8th)
    South Dakota (8th)
    Texas (5th)

    We'll win in the 11th (FL, GA, AL) because it is a heavily Dem court (8-3).

    We'll win in the 9th because it's the 9th (Alaska, AZ, ID, MT, NV will fall).

    The 6th is Sutton (KY, MI, OH, TN). He's likely feeling even more boxed in, as guitaristbl points out. He probably doesn't want to be the one overturned on this. He can leave that up to the judges of the 5th or 8th, if they decided to uphold bans.

  • 61. guitaristbl  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:56 am

    I am sure if there were any material negative consequences, the 9th should have been shut down under this conservative SCOTUS..!
    But indeed some judges may wear that as a badge of honour. See Stephen Reinhardt for example :

    "In 2003, Reinhardt admitted that he "was a liberal from a very young age." "I think I was born that way", he said. However, he does not believe that a Supreme Court reversal means that his opinion is "wrong" or that he "didn't follow the law." "The Supreme Court changes the law regularly. And this Supreme Court – which is the most activist Court there has ever been – is constantly changing the law. So if you really are faithful to the law, you're likely to get reversed because it [the Court] has cut back on rights."

    For a judge invested to his ideas and as experienced as Reinhardt a reversal is more of an indication of a higher court doing its job wrong.

  • 62. guitaristbl  |  October 7, 2014 at 11:58 am

    Haha apparently..!

  • 63. StraightDave  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:05 pm

    So he crushes a church?
    Yeah, God would do that 😛

  • 64. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:06 pm

    Utah just dropped its appeal of a case forcing it to recognize marriages that were performed before the stay was issued. I imagine Wisconsin will do the same.

  • 65. ragefirewolf  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:06 pm

    I'm sticking with my opinion that the 9th is slow, because it is. Like I've said before, they are the busiest Circuit. Like the D.C. Circuit, they are a mini-SCOTUS. They are very heavily populated and deal with the most diverse political landscapes of all of the Circuits.

  • 66. jdw_karasu  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:09 pm

    5th and 8th. These will be the last hold out states:

    Arkansas (8th)
    Louisiana (5th)
    Mississippi (5th)
    Missouri (8th)
    Nebraska (8th)
    North Dakota (8th)
    South Dakota (8th)
    Texas (5th)

    As pointed out above, we will win in the 9th and 11th: our courts. With some luck, the 9th will rule by the end of the year.

    11th is a little trickier. Briefs are due next week in the FL case, but FL may just roll over before the 11th does the deed. That means GA and/or Alabama would need to get their cases to the 11th, so that's a slower clock. As much as it would be good to get FL on the right side quickly given it's large population, there's some benefit to seeing the case continue since it's sitting at the 11th right now: it's a quicker path for GA and AL getting equality.

    A tradeoff: If FL rolls, it's 19,552,860 in pop. If the FL case gets a decision, it's slightly slower for those 19,552,860… but quicker for 14,825,889 of the other two states… which are a pair of states that are a good deal more conservative than FL.

    This was the sad trade off in Perry. We in CA got equality, but the rest of the 9th is still waiting.

  • 67. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:10 pm

    Stay lifted in West Virginia. Defendants required to respond to motion by 10/21. Reply to response due by 10/28.

  • 68. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:11 pm

    Briefs due in South Carolina next week:

  • 69. Randolph_Finder  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:12 pm

    By favorite Organ, do you mean the one that he plays music on or the one that he plays? :)

  • 70. SethInMaryland  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:13 pm

    good , seems things are moving rather quicly now, maybie in WV the defendants will drop out now

  • 71. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:13 pm

    ACLU filed its request:

  • 72. jdw_karasu  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:15 pm


    I was hoping the way this would play out was that Sutton would see the light, but not want to "author" the opinion. That would pass it off to Daughtrey, and we'd get a ruling soon. She probably would understand not to go fire & brimstone in the opinion to give Sutton some points to complain about, forcing some re-writes. Instead, there are plenty of mild writings from other ME opinions that she could crib from, and churn out something that Sutton could sign off on and get it done.

    This year thing… that's worrisome.

    On the other hand, she was rather strongly for us in the hearings, and likely knows the sense of urgency. Crossing fingers for something by the end of October.

  • 73. SethInMaryland  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:15 pm

    our side will move fast in South Carolina

  • 74. jdw_karasu  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:19 pm

    The 10th will slap it down so quickly that it isn't funny. My guess is that the Kitchen defendants would drag it back in front of the same panel as an continuation of the prior case, and that panel would be extremely pissed off at Utah and punt the crap out of them.

  • 75. RnL2008  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:19 pm

    This video was done just after Prop 8 passed…….my family is part of this video……right after the word Equality…..we posted a picture of our family on our wedding day:

    We are ALL just declaring our families like other couples do!!!

  • 76. RnL2008  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:21 pm

    This song uses a bit of humor to curb those rumors:

  • 77. Jen_in_MI  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:27 pm

    I fervently hope that the same happens in MI – my spouse and I married during a brief window on 3/22/14….that would be the best news ever!

  • 78. Randolph_Finder  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:29 pm

    Spoiled by the 7th. That was the legal equivalent of the Delta Tau Chi Deathmobile blowing the whistle and "Ramming Speed"!

  • 79. SethInMaryland  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:29 pm

    kinda Breakiing News in NC: AG Cooper to counties get for marriage equality: ALEIGH, N.C. –
    North Carolina's top lawyer has advised local officials to prepare for an influx of same-sex couples seeking marriage certificates following a federal judge's ruling expected within days.

    Attorney General Roy Cooper said Tuesday that county registers of deeds should expect a ruling from the federal judge striking down the state's ban on same-sex marriages "relatively soon."

    The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear appeals of a July ruling striking down Virginia's gay marriage ban.

    Chief U.S. District Judge William L. Osteen in Greensboro then told lawyers to submit briefs within 10 days on how to move forward in overturning North Carolina's ban.

    Legal experts agree Osteen is obligated to follow the July ruling from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction over North Carolina.

  • 80. StraightDave  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:41 pm

    There's a big advantage in not having to struggle to make it SCOTUS-proof.
    1) Daugherty already knows a halfway reasonable opinion will get rubber-stamped.
    2) The chances of an appeal have dropped considerably. None of the states in the 6th are like Kansas or SC. They know it's time. They just had to go through the motions.

  • 81. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:46 pm

    SCOTUSBlog's coverage today is especially wonderful.



  • 82. buckybear0310b  |  October 7, 2014 at 12:59 pm

    I hear you, but considering we have Van Hemmorhoid as the AG, anything is possible and, as we have seen, logic just doesn't seem to be his strong suit.

  • 83. davepCA  |  October 7, 2014 at 1:04 pm

    The two New Jersey ME trials, before & after DOMA, make it pretty clear that they are not going to get anywhere with a stunt like that.

  • 84. Mike_Baltimore  |  October 7, 2014 at 1:09 pm

    The final words of the second link (". . . after a deliberative process where supporters of marriage exclusions will have a final opportunity to make their case.") says a lot. Opponents of ME have not made a valid case so far (after how many years?), so why should anyone expect them to make a case in the future where they have a final opportunity to make that case?

  • 85. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 1:10 pm

    This is weird. At 11… There appeared a statement on the 9th circuit's opinion listing page. It said, "No Opinions Filed Today." That has now disappeared.

  • 86. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 1:12 pm

    There's a ruling in the IDAHO CASE!!!!

  • 87. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 1:12 pm

  • 88. franklinsewell  |  October 7, 2014 at 1:12 pm


  • 89. AndresM11  |  October 7, 2014 at 1:15 pm

    Another victory for Marriage Equality!!! The Ninth Circuit striked down same-sex marriage bans in Idaho and Nevada!! In an opinion written by Judge Reinhardt, the panel AFFIRMED Latta v Otter (Idaho case) and REVERSED the District Court's decision in Sevcik v Sandoval (Nevada).

    This has been a historic week for our community! Congrats!!

  • 90. RobW303  |  October 7, 2014 at 1:16 pm

    Time for comics to unite in roasting the hell out of this idea in the court of public opinion.

  • 91. JayJonson  |  October 7, 2014 at 1:23 pm

    I think it would vary a great deal from individual to individual and from issue to issue. I suspect that Feldman, for example, a Catholic convert, probably won't care very much if he is overturned because he is no doubt convinced that he did what his religion called on him to do. Probably a lot of liberal judges who have been overturned because they ruled in favor of abortion rights or for affirmative action may be disappointed that their opinions were overturned, but nevertheless glad that they ruled the way they did.

    As to whether it would hurt to be told that you were wrong, it might depend on how much you respect the person who told you that. If you are as contemptuous of Scalia, as most of us here are, it would probably not hurt very much for him to say you are wrong.

    I can see district judges caring about being overturned because in some sense their job is largely technical in terms of applying the proper precedent to the proper situation. Apart from the facts of a case, a district judge generally applies the law rather than creating new legal theories. So if their decisions are overturned they may feel that they have not done a good job technically.

    But the appellate may believe they have greater scope, at least within their circuits.

  • 92. Mike_Baltimore  |  October 7, 2014 at 1:32 pm

    But a tornado is not 'fire and brimstone' as the religious right has been saying will fall from the sky on those states allowing ME. The religious right has been saying 'fire and brimstone' for some years now..

    You can now expect the religious right to use your comment as a 'factual' statement that the two are the same.


  • 93. Waxr  |  October 7, 2014 at 1:46 pm

    Genesis 19:24 says, "the Lord rained down fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah."

    If it is not fire and brimstone, it does not count.

    BTW: I don't see any fundies rushing out of the country before God wrecks his vengeance.

  • 94. Ragavendran  |  October 7, 2014 at 1:58 pm

    Surprisingly, the Fifth Circuit just granted the Plaintiffs' motion (opposed by Texas) to expedite oral argument. A date hasn't been set yet, but it'll likely be in November, as requested.

  • 95. Margo Schulter  |  October 7, 2014 at 2:45 pm

    Great quote from Ninth Circuit ruling on Idaho (upholding Magistrate Judge Candy Dale), at p. 21, n. 12, addressing arguments of Governor Otter: “He also states, in conclusory fashion, that allowing same-sex marriage will lead opposite-sex couples to abuse alcohol and drugs, engage in extramarital affairs, take on demanding work schedules, and participate in time-consuming hobbies. We seriously doubt that allowing committed same-sex couples to settle down in legally recognized marriages will drive opposite-sex couples to sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll.”

  • 96. RnL2008  |  October 7, 2014 at 3:00 pm

    A while back ago when this fight started, there was a map out that basically showed that the States you listed above would need to be dragged into the 21st century kicking and screaming along the way and that it would take until 2024 to bring the last few states into compliance……..I would say maybe sooner, but we shouldn't expect them to come quietly!!!

  • 97. Margo Schulter  |  October 7, 2014 at 3:09 pm

    Ninth Circuit at p. 28: Note that parental theories of “complementary” maternal and paternal roles might run afoul of United States v. Virginia (1996). I might read this as dictum that Idaho statute might violate Equal Protection Clause as sex discrimination as well as sexual orientation discrimination (subject to heightened scrutiny under SmithKline.

  • 98. Margo Schulter  |  October 7, 2014 at 3:30 pm

    Judge Reinhardt strongly supports decision of Court, but writes separate concurrence to present view that marriage bans violate not only Equal Protection Clause (subjecting discrimination based on sexual orientation to heightened scrutiny in Ninth Circuit) but also fundamental right of marriage under Due Process Clause, calling for yet more exacting standard of strict scrutiny. (Starts p. 44 of whole PDF document.)

  • 99. Margo Schulter  |  October 7, 2014 at 3:32 pm

    Judge Reinhardt goes with LovingZablockiTurner trio, and emphasizes that defining a fundamental right under the Due Process Clause must indeed be “careful,” but not “cramped.”

  • 100. Zack12  |  October 7, 2014 at 6:53 pm

    Looking them up, I really don't see any.
    Even the Democrats are on the more conservative side.

  • 101. Zack12  |  October 7, 2014 at 7:08 pm

    Indeed, you can't say you'd be okay with civil unions or domestic partnerships since they aren't called marriage and then ban them as well or fight to keep them from becoming law as well.

  • 102. Zack12  |  October 7, 2014 at 7:10 pm

    I could see TN fighting it all the way.

  • 103. Zack12  |  October 7, 2014 at 7:12 pm

    Indeed, we should celebrate but also keep in mind there WILL be backlash.
    States like UT,OK are NOT going to take this ruling lying down.
    There will be blowback, we just need to make sure we are prepared for that.

  • 104. Christian0811  |  October 7, 2014 at 7:19 pm

    I'm sure the fundies are so glad they passed Amendment One 😉

  • 105. Eric  |  October 7, 2014 at 7:36 pm

    Kozinski, Chief Judge of the 9th Circuit, once said of SCOTUS reversals of his decisions, "[t]hey can't catch 'em all."

  • 106. guitaristbl  |  October 8, 2014 at 5:47 am

    Among all the 9th circ. craziness I missed that one here. Interesting. The same judge who refused a motion to expedite when the case first reached the 5th now grants it after the SCOTUS action. They may have panicked a bit and are rushing to rule against most likely. The chance of them to think this is definitive action and want to rule in favour of the plaintiffs to get done with it seems very unlikely.
    But for the first time plaintiffs in a ME case are getting something they want and that's opposed by Texas in that circuit. A big step there still.

  • 107. JayJonson  |  October 8, 2014 at 6:23 am

    I can't wait to see how this plays out. The petition for expedition is based on the fact that one of the plaintiffs is pregnant and wants her partner to have parental rights when the child is born. They already have another child, and was able to secure joint parentage, but only after an expensive and uncertain adoption process. That was a tangible hardship that they hope to avoid by getting married.

    I was also surprised that the Fifth Circuit granted the motion. I hope it means that they got the message sent by SCOTUS and will do the right thing.

  • 108. brooklyn11217  |  October 8, 2014 at 6:33 am

    So much for believing a court website in the future. They can and do what they want when it comes to issuing opinions. 😉

  • 109. guitaristbl  |  October 8, 2014 at 7:41 am

    And the 6th published an opinion argued on August 25 (!) but when it comes to ME they are taking their time. Or Sutton had a sudden change of mind after Monday and we'll be waiting a little longer.
    Take as long as you like judge. Let's establish ME in the 35 states that's possible now, lets make it even harder to reverse without creating a huge legal chaos.

  • 110. tushargoyal357  |  October 15, 2014 at 2:48 pm

    One of the best blog to find details related to Happy Diwali 2014 , to find Diwali Rangoli , Happy Diwali 2014 Greetings and Happy Diwali Wallpapers and Images 2014

Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!