Leave a Comment Sagesse
House GOP to quickly appeal DOMA cases to Supreme Court
June 21, 2012
By Jacob Combs
Yesterday, the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG), which has been defending the constitutionality of DOMA in court on behalf of the House of Representatives’s Republican leadership, filed a motion in the Pedersen v. OPM case seeking a stay of proceedings. The Pedersen case was filed in Connecticut district court, and BLAG argues that since the case falls under the same appellate court (the Second Circuit Court of Appeals) as another case, Windsor v. USA, in which a New York district court judge struck DOMA down, Pedersen should be stayed until an appellate decision is made in the Windsor case.
Buried in BLAG’s brief in Pedersen, though, is a little nugget about the companion DOMA cases of Gill v. OPM and Massachusetts v. HHS, in which the First Circuit Court of Appeals recently filed a consolidated decision upholding a district court ruling that declared DOMA unconstitutional. The First Circuit decision set the Massachusetts case on the road to the Supreme Court, with a deadline for filing a petition for certiorari (essentially, appellate review by the high court) set for August 29. In their Pedersen filing, BLAG makes it clear that they will move much more quickly to appeal the Massachusetts case to the U.S. Supreme Court:
The House now is preparing a petition for certiorari in the Massachusetts case, a petition which it intends to file by the end of this month. Massachusetts is a good candidate for Supreme Court review, as the First Circuit itself recognized: “Supreme Court review of DOMA is highly likely.” If the Supreme Court grants certiorari in Massachusetts, which we think is likely, the Court likely will docket the case for briefing, argument and decision during the October 2012 Term (3).
Once BLAG files its petition by the end of June, the other parties will have 30 days to respond with their arguments as to whether or not the Supreme Court should take up the case. Because the Court will be on summer recess starting sometime next week, a decision on whether or not it would take up the case would likely wait until the fall term. Because of the significance of the constitutional issue at hand and the ever-inceasing number of challenges to DOMA being filed across the country, it seems very likely that the Supreme Court will take up the Massachusetts case. However, it is also possible that it could hold onto the case without refusing to rehear it to allow for other district or appellate courts to weigh in on the statute’s constitutionality.
Having technical problems? E-mail equalityontrial AT couragecampaign DOT org for assistance!
10 Comments Leave a Comment
1.
Fan | June 21, 2012 at 8:21 am
so the SCOTUS may take the DOMA case before the (possible) Prop 8 case then?
2.
Derek Williams | June 21, 2012 at 8:32 am
Through their aversion-therapeutic policies, Republicans, like most homophobes and religious zealots, have determined that the more they make life miserable for homosexuals, the more desirable and alluring the opposite sex will ipso facto become to us.
3.
Straight Dave | June 21, 2012 at 8:48 am
Sorry, but I don't give them that much credit for being "helpful". I think it is more likely that they are looking out for their own interests, such as they are. They think that by making your lfe difficult, you will slink back into the closet so they don't have to be discomforted by your presence or existence. Out of sight, out of mind. I think they really would prefer to delude themselves into believing that you have truly "gone away".
But I admit it is hard to put myself inside their heads. Maybe that's because I'm in one of those fuzzy ill-defined categories – neither gay nor anti-gay.
4.
AnonyGrl | June 21, 2012 at 10:15 am
Not fuzzy or ill defined at all Dave, you are, I declare, a good and decent human being.
5.
Carpool Cookie | June 21, 2012 at 10:41 am
"Republicans, like most homophobes and religious zealots, have determined that the more they make life miserable for homosexuals, the more desirable and alluring the opposite sex will ipso facto become to us."
They may have overplayed their hand with this one. Fewer and fewer men will be willing to have sex with them in airport restroom stalls, if they keep it up!
6.
Carpool Cookie | June 21, 2012 at 10:42 am
So…when are they answerable as to presenting a tally of what their stupid legal bills are?
7.
Steven .k | June 21, 2012 at 10:45 am
<img src=http://www.mobilediscount.info/ikea/sso.jpg>I just hope they don't hold onto the case as you said. <img src=http://www.mobilediscount.info/xbox/xss.jpg>
8.
Angel | June 21, 2012 at 10:46 am
And it's mind-blowing how this GO-Proud people sells their souls and existent when they decide to endorse Mr. Romney for President of the USA. They know, or they are probably in denial on how these Republicans feel about gays and our rights, they would like us to be put all together back in the closet, or like just retire us to another planet. These soul-less GoProud people have "no balls" to stand up to their own leaders. I am curious, are they going to be allow to participate on their Republican convention, and have a speaking opportunity at their podium? I don't think so…. I feel so bad and sad for them.
9.
Sagesse | June 21, 2012 at 2:35 pm
@
10. Prop 8 Trial Tracker &raq&hellip | December 13, 2012 at 5:30 pm
[...] Jacob wrote this morning, the Republican-led House, leading the defense of DOMA through the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group [...]
Leave a Comment
XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.