Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Prop 8 trial: White House declines comment regarding appeal

Prop 8 trial

By Adam Bink

In today’s question-and-answer session with the White House press corps, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney declined comment regarding whether the Administration wants the Supreme Court to take up the case or not. Washington Blade’s Chris Johnson, who asked the questions:

Washington Blade: There’s going to be a lot of attention on the Supreme Court next week because it will consider whether to take up several pending marriage cases related to both the Defense of Marriage and California’s Proposition 8. The Justice Department has already made its views known on the DOMA cases, but given the president’s previously stated opposition to Prop 8 and his support for marriage equality, does the administration want the Supreme Court to take up the Prop 8 case in hopes of making some national ruling on same-sex marriage, or, as plaintiffs in the case have requested, do you prefer that the court allow the lower court ruling to stand striking down the marriage ban ruling just in California?

Jay Carney: That’s quite a question and I will ask you to direct it to the Justice Department. I’m not going to make policy toward Supreme Court cases from here.

Washington Blade: Generally speaking, though, would the president welcome the Supreme Court taking a case in which they could rule in favor of same-sex marriage across the country?

Carney: Yeah. I don’t have anything to say on that at this time.

The Supreme Court declining to take the case would certainly make an interesting impact on the presidential race. In theory, we could even have legal same-sex marriage in the nation’s largest state by the time of the first Presidential debate in October.

What are your thoughts on how the Supreme Court decision regarding certiorari would impact the Presidential race?


  • 1. Straight Ally #3008  |  September 18, 2012 at 1:57 pm

    I'm still annoyed by the Chick-fil-A support, let alone what a court decision might do.

  • 2. Gregory in SLC  |  September 19, 2012 at 6:33 pm

    did you happen to see the latest CFA news?

  • 3. Sebastian  |  September 18, 2012 at 2:01 pm

    The thing is Romney has been walking a tight rope, not really discussing the issue but signing the pledge (which he can talk about in general terms and the other points in it)
    If California has equal marriage before debates it will be big issue and he will have to take a stand (flip-flop) and either risk losing conservative base voters or turning off moderates. Obama has no risk because he is clear in his position and so is his party.
    Lets all hope that SCOTUS declines Prop 8 case so equality can resume there and people can see further evidence of the sky not falling down.

  • 4. Anthony  |  September 18, 2012 at 4:28 pm

    It's been legal in New York for over a year now. Nothing has happened. If these people can't realize that then they're just a lost cause.

  • 5. Mike in Baltimore  |  September 18, 2012 at 6:57 pm

    And for more than 8 years in Massachusetts.

    Notice how few times you now hear about 'Taxachusetts'? Maybe the GOTP doesn't refer to it so much nowadays so people won't realize it's still here 8 years after marriage equality was attained in the state. Gives me hope that when Prop H8 is finally disposed of, the GOTP will stop talking about 'San Francisco Democrats' for the same reason they no longer stress 'Taxachusetts' (the 'San Francisco Democrats' phrase hits home, as former Speaker Pelosi was born and grew up in Baltimore's Little Italy, about 3 miles from where I live). I pity the next state/jurisdiction that gets slapped with a GOTP slur (Washington, DC or Washington state? Maryland?). I think DC will be ignored by the GOTP, as then they would have to acknowledge that there are few voting rights in DC, and what few voting rights DC has are subject to interference from Congress.

  • 6. AnonyGrl  |  September 19, 2012 at 6:20 am

    Quite a lot has happened in New York in the past year. Thousands of couples have gotten married. Millions of dollars of tourist income has come into the state. Wedding and reception businesses have seen massive increases in their revenues. Thousands of families have gotten health insurance and other benefits sorted out. Many children have, at long last, seen their loving parents relationships recognized by the state. Friends and families of these newly married folks have been able to celebrate some of the best moments of their lives together. Love has won the day!

    The sky has not fallen, it has been raised!


  • 7. Tyler  |  September 18, 2012 at 2:03 pm

    Well the President clearly doesn't want the Court to take the issue up before the election. I doubt it would play terribly well in Ohio, Florida, Virginia, etc. Personally, I doubt that something as arcane as SCOTUS granting certiorari on this issue would get much play in the month and a half before the election, but they don't want it.

    That said, I think it would be best for them to deny cert in this case, anyway. We get marriage equality in California, which is a huge deal. The Ninth Circuit's decision will provide a great precedent for AFER and Olson/Boies to file a new case in Arizona. So will the Supreme Court's decision in DOMA, which is a much easier thing to ask this Court to do. So then, in 2015, after Obama has had the chance to perhaps even put another Justice in there, and after national opinion has evolved even more, after marriage equality has been approved at the ballot box in a few states, and by the legislature in a few more (probably bringing the total from 6+DC to maybe 12), the Supreme Court can complete the job. I think that will be better for everyone, make it look less like Roe v. Wade, and carry less risk that Kennedy freaks out.

  • 8. Mike in Baltimore  |  September 19, 2012 at 1:13 pm

    SCOTUS denying cert might even be a blessing in disguise.

    Those who don't know court procedures (which is the vast majority of the haters) might think by denying cert, SCOTUS is saying "We don't want to touch this type of case" and the haters and their supporters might think they've won. Granted, they'd be somewhat puzzled if any DOMA cases are accepted, but they will downplay those for quite a while, only getting everyone revved up after the election when arguments might be scheduled.

    By then, though, we should be weeks or months past the election. And if arguments are scheduled near the end of January, the beginning of the new Congress and the inauguration (no matter who wins) could and would completely overwhelm any SCOTUS news.

    (And if anyone hasn't figured it out yet, I'm a glass half full person, not a person who views the glass as half empty.)

  • 9. Tim in Sonoma  |  September 18, 2012 at 2:22 pm

    It is my opinion that the Supreme Court will not want to get involved in this argument, at least not right now.

  • 10. Jeff Baily  |  September 18, 2012 at 2:49 pm

    The Massachusetts case has a better shot before the Supreme Court, I feel.

  • 11. Anthony  |  September 18, 2012 at 4:30 pm

    I agree, I think DOMA is a much more plausible case for the court to address.

  • 12. Diego  |  September 18, 2012 at 3:00 pm

    I don't think any decision of the SCOTUS on this issue will have a great impact on the presidential race. I am more concerned about the influence it could have on the several state referenda about marriage. Court decisions in favor of gay rights have had an immediate negative influence on the public opinion about same sex marriage rights. A court-mandated gay marriage in CA one month before the elections ay not sit well on some groups of people. I think the best outcome is that the court makes a decision after the election day.

  • 13. Jim H.  |  September 18, 2012 at 4:25 pm

    My understanding is, if SCOTUS decides not to take the case (which means marriage returns to California based on the Ninth Circuit's decision), that will be known by October 1–well before the election. The only way the court would make a decision after election day would be If it decides to take the case; in this scenario there will be no decision from the Court published until next June (even if it hears the case prior to the election).

  • 14. Tony  |  September 18, 2012 at 9:59 pm

    SCOTUS can defer could defer the decision. They don't have to grant/deny cert to every case that is scheduled for a conference. They could also send it back to the Ninth Circuit asking them to do-over.

  • 15. Stefan  |  September 18, 2012 at 10:16 pm

    That very rarely ever happens

  • 16. fiona64  |  September 20, 2012 at 8:56 am

    "Court-mandated gay marriage"? What do you think, that the courts are going to issue you a same-sex partner? Good grief.

  • 17. Theo McKinney  |  September 18, 2012 at 3:58 pm

    Mittens will say something Akin-esque that will dog him until November. the GOP is toast.

  • 18. Anthony  |  September 18, 2012 at 4:30 pm

    The 47% remark is what you're talking about lol.

  • 19. Mike in Baltimore  |  September 18, 2012 at 7:04 pm

    I'm sure Mittens is still holding back on the dumb comment he's capable of uttering. The 47% statement is close to the low, but I have faith that he can go even lower.


  • 20. AnonyGrl  |  September 19, 2012 at 6:29 am

    Breitbart is claiming that there are 2 minutes of that speech following those remarks that were either not recorded or were cut out that somehow EXPLAIN those remarks.

    What on earth could anyone say that would mitigate saying that 47% of the country are lazy bums who are insisting the government support them? Or Romney saying that he is not going to concern himself with them? If the man wants to be my president, he damn well BETTER concern himself with me.

    I am currently undergoing chemo for cancer. I just got insurance a year ago, and without Obama, that would have been impossible, as the cancer was discovererd about a month before I started this job. I continue to work, and to pay into the medicare and social security system even while I am being treated. I make little enough money that, at the end of the year, I get pretty much all of my taxes back. That puts me squarely in Romney's 47%, and I support President Obama. There is nothing Romney could ever say that would induce me to vote for him. But if he is elected, it will be his JOB to take care of ME. That is what the President is charged with doing… the best for all citizens, not just the rich ones.

  • 21. Steve  |  September 22, 2012 at 3:39 am

    Like he said "Just kidding folks" in those two minutes

  • 22. Lady Mabelyne  |  September 19, 2012 at 12:42 am

    Go ride your hose Ann. It's over.

  • 23. Chris in Lathrop  |  September 21, 2012 at 6:08 pm

    I prefer this statement. Sounds nice and dirty like everything else the Repugs do!

  • 24. Lady Mabelyne  |  September 19, 2012 at 12:43 am


  • 25. Chris in Lathrop  |  September 21, 2012 at 6:09 pm

    So, do I understand correctly that, if the USSC grants cert we'll hear it on Monday, and therefore if it's not announced Monday, cert is not granted?

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