Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Equality news round-up: Sixth Circuit fallout, and more

LGBT Legal Cases Marriage equality Marriage Equality Trials

It's time for marriage equality. Attribution: JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images
It’s time for marriage equality. Attribution: JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images
– A lawyer for the Michigan couple is drafting a petition to the Supreme Court in the marriage case.

– The ACLU will petition the Supreme Court for review in one of the Ohio cases.

– The National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) released a statement on the Sixth Circuit’s ruling, but they haven’t said if they will file a petition in the Tennessee case.

– Republican congresspeople in North Carolina have filed a notice of appeal to the Fourth Circuit in that state’s marriage case.

Thanks to Equality Case Files for these filings


  • 1. Silvershrimp0  |  November 7, 2014 at 8:11 am

    A bit of good news this morning. A federal district judge in Missouri had ruled against the state's ban. The decision is stayed pending appeal.

  • 2. franklinsewell  |  November 7, 2014 at 8:52 am

    Here's the opinion and order from Equality Case Files:

  • 3. brandall  |  November 7, 2014 at 8:14 am

    As long as I am alive, I pledge I will do everything possible to insure “Judge” Jeffrey S. Sutton never ascends to the Supreme Court.

  • 4. debater7474  |  November 7, 2014 at 8:21 am

    There's no need to get worked up. Sutton ruled in favor of Obamacare, so he's never getting appointed by a Republican president. He may as well have pissed on the Virgin Mary.

  • 5. brandall  |  November 7, 2014 at 9:01 am

    I very respectfully disagree with your "never" opinion. Most people said Santorum (from your state) would "never" survive his 2007 opinions. He placed 2nd to Romney in the last presidential Republican nomination. History has a short memory.

  • 6. debater7474  |  November 7, 2014 at 9:42 am

    Respectfully, the two situations are not analogous.

  • 7. JayJonson  |  November 7, 2014 at 10:24 am

    I agree with brandall. With his opinion in the marriage cases, Sutton has established himself as a real contender for a SCOTUS appointment. He has cast himself as a brave defender of traditional marriage, and a proponent of both originalism and federalism. He will be loved by members of the Federalist Society. Should a Republican win the 2016 election for President, he or she will consider Sutton very carefully for a nomination to the Court.

  • 8. Zack12  |  November 7, 2014 at 10:27 am

    Indeed, just another reason why 2016 is so important.

  • 9. DrPatrick1  |  November 7, 2014 at 1:40 pm

    2nd, but never ever within striking distance of the presidency. AND, had he been nominated, I bet we would have had the kind of election not seen since 1984!

  • 10. RnL2008  |  November 7, 2014 at 10:27 am

    I'm with ya there…..not on our watch will that Justice be given a seat on SCOTUS!!!

  • 11. Jen_in_MI  |  November 7, 2014 at 12:14 pm

    That bastard deserves his place on the WRONG side of history. I'm ready to Bork him when the time comes, spineless POS that he is!!!

  • 12. Jen_in_MI  |  November 7, 2014 at 12:18 pm

    I am pleased that DeBoer will be appealed to SCOTUS. It's the only case since Hollingsworth where a full trial was conducted complete with findings of fact that must be considered (despite the fact that that bastard Sutton did not do so). It's a good vehicle to get our equal marriage rights once and for all. May Sutton rot in hell for being so hateful and willfully stupid.

  • 13. Zack12  |  November 7, 2014 at 12:19 pm

    Throw in Cook as well. She will have the "honor" of being known as the only female judge to rule against marriage equality.

  • 14. RnL2008  |  November 7, 2014 at 7:37 pm

    Is it to early to add a star to my flag for Missouri?

  • 15. DACiowan  |  November 7, 2014 at 8:07 pm

    Probably not since the three most populous areas already issue licenses. (so Kansas #33, Missouri #34? Vice versa?)

  • 16. RnL2008  |  November 7, 2014 at 8:10 pm

    Then I need to add another star…only have 33 at the moment!!

  • 17. DACiowan  |  November 7, 2014 at 8:28 pm

    Although technically we don't get Kansas until next Tuesday night and nobody is certain on what is going on in Missouri. Wikipedia is having an argument over the Missouri striping on the marriage map, although Wiki gets in arguments on days ending in Y.

  • 18. franklinsewell  |  November 7, 2014 at 8:39 pm

    DACIowan … I thought the wiki-map had it right when it was Gold and Light Blue, and not the current dark and light blue.

  • 19. F_Young  |  November 8, 2014 at 1:45 am

    I'm not sure if his has been posted already:

    All The Wrong Reasons to Ban Gay Unions
    "…a respected conservative thinker who’s unlikely to make it either to the Supreme Court bench or the right side of history when it comes to same-sex marriage, but who is still a judge’s judge, a consummate professional."

    No, Sutton's opinion can best be understood as his last and best chance to be promoted to the SCOTUS by making amends to the Republican Party for his heretical support of the Affordable Care Act.

  • 20. F_Young  |  November 8, 2014 at 1:55 am

    Closer to crunch time for gay marriage

  • 21. F_Young  |  November 9, 2014 at 1:45 am

    U-M law expert: Circuit court ruling means gay marriage in Michigan unlikely before 2016

    I say 2015 instead of 2016, but I agree with the following counter-intuitive analysis:

    "'A Supreme Court ruling saying every state in the union needs to recognize same sex marriage is in the political interest of the Republican Party.'
    "In Primus' view, many Republican politicians would like to see the Supreme Court take the case and legalize gay marriage across the country.
    "'It's a loser with the electorate for the Republicans, and more so with each passing year. The party is split and would like the issue to go away. As long as the issue is still live it helps Democrats,' he said.
    "'If the Supreme Court intervenes, the issue goes away for moderate Republicans and others will be able to run against the 'crazy liberal activist courts.'"

  • 22. JayJonson  |  November 9, 2014 at 6:34 am

    Primus's political analysis is wrong. It is not in the interest of the Republican Party for the issue to go away everywhere. It may be in the interest of national candidates and in the interest of moderate Republicans in blue or purple states for the issue to go away. Nationally, and in moderate states, the issue can bite them in the butt.

    However, it is very much in the interest of Republican candidates in red states and of extreme Republican candidates to say that they are valiantly fighting against Godless homosexuals to protect religious freedom by preventing deviant couples from redefining marriage. After all, only God can redefine marriage or biology. These are the people who will continue to fight against gay rights, and they are the people that the Republicans cannot win without.

  • 23. JayJonson  |  November 9, 2014 at 9:31 am

    The most frightening part of Primus's analysis, particularly in light of the discussion on the other threads about whether marriages performed in the Sixth Circuit before the Circuit's ruling, is that Primus believes that the Michigan marriages are likely invalid.

    He seems to think that they are analagous to the 2004 San Francisco marriages rather than the ones performed after the California Supreme Court ruling in 2008.

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