Equality On Trial

2107538 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fequalityontrial.com%2F2012%2F10%2F01%2Fsupreme-court-waiting-to-issue-prop-8-ruling%2FSupreme+Court+Waiting+to+Issue+Prop+8+Ruling2012-10-01+19%3A00%3A02mattymatthttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.prop8trialtracker.com%2F%3Fp%3D21075 Leave a Comment

• 1. Stephen  |  October 1, 2012 at 12:21 pm

  Are you saying that since the SCOTUS has not denied the Cert at the point that it is likely they will hear arguments on the Prop 8 issue?

• 2. Elizabeth  |  October 1, 2012 at 1:54 pm

  I am always appreciative for info on prop8. However, I having a problem with this report just a few days after the report that there were rumblings about there being no judgement until after the election. This really gives mixed messages to those not acclimated to the case.

• 3. Seth from Maryland  |  October 1, 2012 at 2:03 pm

  NEW Maryland Poll Finds Support Surging for Maryland Marriage Equality Referendum
  Voters favor the new marriage equality law by 49% to 39%, with more than half of African-American voters in favor, The Baltimore Sun poll of likely voters found support continues to grow among African Americans, who comprise about 25% of voters in Maryland, a heavily Democratic state. According to the poll, “more than half of likely black voters favor legalizing same-sex marriage, compared with a quarter who are opposed.”
  Black voters are expected to turn out in high numbers to vote for President Barack Obama, which makes their position on marriage equality critical to the passage of Question 6. President Obama leads Mitt Romney 57% to 34% in the poll, and Maryland Democrats widely approve of the marriage equality referendum, with 60% in favor compared to 26% of Republicans.

• 4. Seth from Maryland  |  October 1, 2012 at 2:06 pm

  The increasing support among African-American voters marks a “dramatic shift,” according to the Sun, and tracks with other recent polling. Last week, a Gonzalez poll found that while black voters opposed the referendum by 52% to 44%, support had jumped from a low of 33% in January. The Gonzalez poll found the referendum with an 8-point advantage overall, at 51% to 43%.
  The change is attitudes among African Americans is attributed in part to President Obama’s personal support for the issue and the endorsement from the national NAACP, which is headquartered in Baltimore. Following those two developments in May, a Hart poll in August found black voters about evenly split on the issue at 44% to 45%, compared to 40% in favor and 49% opposed in March.
  http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equalit…

• 5. Tony  |  October 1, 2012 at 2:23 pm

  This is a common problem in all fields of journalism. There is nothing new to report, but there are still columns to be written, TV news slots to be filmed. Hence the media resort to speculation about what will happen when something finally does. Even if the first to say something makes it clear that they are just guessing, or enumerating the options … by the time the article is quoted, then re-reported, then re-re-reported, all of that is lost and a bunch of people are declaring that the Supreme court is holding off a decision until after the election as if it were a fact – when actually only nine people really know what happened at the SCOTUS conference last Monday (well perhaps some clerks too).

  I'm guessing that there might not be an "October 8th" list from SCOTUS (That's Columbus Day … I think it's a Federal holiday). So the next "we might know" date is probably the 9th.

• 6. Elizabeth  |  October 1, 2012 at 2:35 pm

  Thanks for the clear reply to this. I just dislike the "baiting" so to speak in all media forms. "the thing that could kill you tonight at dinner coming up at 11" "5 things never to say at an interview…coming up on Monday's newscast" "we could hear something about prop8 at any moment" etc. My biggest issue is that in the "updates" on one of the earlier reports they (not the comments) were speculating about these "after election" rumblings..only now to say "we could hear something at anytime"

• 7. David  |  October 1, 2012 at 3:14 pm

  They're doing their best. They aren't drawing you in to have ads flashing all over the site like Fox News. Lay off the good guys, please.

• 8. Owen  |  October 1, 2012 at 4:44 pm

  I really wish he'd stop mentioning poll figures without citing the polls!

• 9. Jim H.  |  October 1, 2012 at 10:12 pm

  I think Matt is simply saying that since we haven't heard anything from the Court, the Court hasn't decided that they won't hear the case. I believe the Court can still reject the case at a later date.

• 10. Lance - CA  |  October 2, 2012 at 12:24 am

  I'm writing this comment mostly to vent to those who understand how I feel… Every single day of my life at some point (when I'm thinking about Prop. 8 usually), I just feel so fucking beaten down. I am so damn tired of checking this site EVERY SINGLE FREAKING DAY FOR YEARS NOW just hoping and praying for good news of some kind! Each and every step of getting rid of these hateful torturous laws just seems to take SO MUCH FIGHTING. I'm just tired of it. SO tired of it.

• 11. Lance - CA  |  October 2, 2012 at 12:25 am

  I live in Sacramento, and I've been waiting to marry the love of my life for years now. Waiting as patiently as anyone ever could when the keys to their freedom (to marry) have been dangled right in front of their face year after year after year! I'm just so angry and so mentally fatigued by this endless fight that just keeps dragging on day after day and week after week and month after month and so on for what feels like forever! Prop. 8 is such a disgusting stain on the State that I love, and it never should have even passed! So many people took it for granted that California would never take such a step backwards, and they underestimated the hatred of so many people and how far those people would go to manipulate the voters into actually removing such a fundamental right from their fellow citizens.

• 12. Lance - CA  |  October 2, 2012 at 12:27 am

  And what makes it so much harder to deal with is that so many of my friends are actually in Same-Sex Marriages that are perfectly legal and recognized by the State of California because they were performed in that precious window of time before Prop. 8 passed. I am so happy for my friends that they were able to get married like that (and that their marriages were not taken away from them), but it is such a constant reminder that just because I didn't meet my future husband until after that awful day in November, 2008, I can't be treated like a regular citizen… even though I pay the same goddamn taxes that everyone else does!!!

• 13. Lance - CA  |  October 2, 2012 at 12:28 am

  I didn't sleep for days after Prop. 8 passed. I literally couldn't sleep for days… When I actually was able to sleep again, NEVER in my most horrific nightmares did I think that it would take SO DREADFULLY LONG to get rid of a law that is so obviously wrong. I didn't think that the California Supreme Court (who had just guaranteed LGBT citizens that it was THEIR RIGHT to marry also) would abandon us like they did. I take that personally, and I flat-out *hate* them for that. As long as I live, I will never forgive the court for the pain that that painfully flawed 2009 decision has caused so many people.

  Not one day passes in my life that I don't think about my second-class citizenship. I am so mad about it every day that I believe it is taking years off my life. It seems like the "wheels of justice" have been running over me and killing me slowly for so long, and I am losing hope that they will ever pass. The one comfort I have is reading the comments on this site from others who know this feeling and are also trying to get through it. There are some good people here.

• 14. Lance - CA  |  October 2, 2012 at 12:30 am

  I feel like SCOTUS is going to wait forever to do the right thing. This last 7 days seemed to take years because I was so hopeful that today they would deny cert in the Prop. 8 case. Now we don't know what the hell is holding up the process and when they might actually do something. This is torture to me. If they would just give us a date when SOMETHING might happen, I could sleep better at night. I would have something to look forward to. But I don't have that. They could sit on this forever, and no one can do a damn thing to hurry them up! Meanwhile, people die waiting on rights they should have had their whole lives! I never used to believe in heaven or hell, but as time goes on, I feel more and more like the existence of hell is a certainty. I know beyond the shadow of a doubt that I am in it…

• 15. Dennis  |  October 2, 2012 at 12:31 am

  I think not. The most likely reason for putting off a decision was to consider the cert petition at the same time as the DOMA cases. Those won't be up for consideration until after the election. So while it is possible that we could hear about Prop 8 on some interim date, the fact that nothing happened on 9/25 (when they could have announced that cert was granted) or today (when they could have announced cert denied) strongly suggests that we will learn the case's fate after the election.

  Although I would love to know how this turns out right now, it is better if the decision gets put off until after the election. A decision denying cert could very well boost the anti-gay efforts in the 4 states voting on this issue. Whenever we score a win in court, there is usually a short-term drop in public support for our side. A decision to deny cert in October and a restoration of gay marriage in CA as the result of litigation could well trigger that short-term dip right at the very time the voters are casting ballots in 4 states. Far better to let this sit for a few more weeks. We've been through this for 4 years, we can wait a few more weeks.

• 16. Michael  |  October 2, 2012 at 1:30 am

  I, too, am in California, but I'm single for now. I'm very tired of this long wait, too. The problem is that the Supreme Court ruled in the summer of 2008 that this abomination could be on the ballot. It made no sense to me then or now. They ruled in May that we were a suspect class and no law could change that. Then they turned around a few months later and allowed a ballot measure against a suspect class. That's where they let us down and plunged us into this 4-year-long nightmare. Then after Prop. 8 passed, our side took it to court with the useless argument about it being an amendment or revision when the case should have been on the grounds that it was a vote against a suspect class of citizens! The good news is that no matter what happens, there will be a decision no later than June of 2013. There is a light at the end of the tunnel.

• 17. Broad or Narrow?  |  October 2, 2012 at 4:30 am

  Perhaps the question comes down to how broad or narrow does SCOTUS want to go? Having DOMA and Prop 8 during the same turn almost screams for a broad ruling. What is the core issue that may address both DOMA and Prop 8? The main issue for both cases is whether or not gay and lesbian couples have a fundamental right to marry. Its almost silly with all these cases before the court to apply a pice meal narrow resolution to the issue before the court. IMHO.

• 18. Stefan  |  October 2, 2012 at 5:26 am

  Exactly. A big indicator for that is the fact that they also relisted Brewer v Diaz for a later date as well.

• 19. Sagesse  |  October 2, 2012 at 5:29 am

  Just posted a Quick Hit from Keen News which says:

  "… on Wednesday afternoon, September 26, a notice was posted in the press room at the Supreme Court, indicating the case was being “rescheduled” for a later conference meeting. As of deadline this week, the docket did not indicate a new conference date for the highly watched case."

  It's astonishing that no one following this case so closely picked this up last week.

  Read the whole article.
  http://www.keennewsservice.com/2012/10/01/court-p…

• 20. Nick  |  October 2, 2012 at 7:44 am

  I find it highly offensive that SCOTUS is politicizing MY RIGHTS and deliberately ignoring and postponing any decisions on certiorari for DOMA and Prop 8.

• 21. Gregory in SLC  |  October 2, 2012 at 8:28 am

  Good Article! You the Quick-Hit Queen : D !

• 22. Gregory in SLC  |  October 2, 2012 at 8:56 am

  I hear you! Hang there Lance….hope is near! Glad you decided to vent here…many of us can relate!

  p.s. I haven't gotten very enthusiastic about the insubstantial prop 8 news…after 4 years waiting get a little jaded. Will celebrate when we have some real news!

• 23. Jim  |  October 2, 2012 at 9:19 am

  First, everyone–Take a deep breath….and release…..

  Second, when you consider that it was only five years ago that the timeline for marriage equality was "never", we now stand a mere nine months away at worst for California to have a return to marriage equality.

  But some things to consider:

  Please remember that if SCOTUS does not grant certiorari, as much as this would be a great thing for California, it will only be a great thing for California.

• 24. Jim  |  October 2, 2012 at 9:19 am

  If SCOTUS does grant certiorari, the impact could be to all 50 and territories!

  Keep in mind that as distinct the circumstances are for the Prop 8 case and the assorted DOMA cases, SCOTUS may be wanting to do their preliminary review to determine if there is some overlap in issues, and with the number of DOMA cases coming up through the courts, as much as it makes sense to hold off on any decision for DOMA cases until those others catch up, a little patience on our part would be wise, as review by the court will have greater impact.

  Personally, I don't think that SCOTUS will grant certiorari to Prop 8, but I don't think they are being malicious or political in holding off on that decision–Just cautious.

  And think about it: You have nine whole months to plan that wedding!

  Nine Months!!!! At worst!!!!!!!

• 25. Carpool_Cookie  |  October 2, 2012 at 10:56 am

  Another way to look at it is we have won in all the courts we've appeared in. The Prop H8 case is actually setting up a much firmer foundation in the area of law than gays and lesbians had before. It IS VERY VERY frustrating to be in a lawsuit….which is why something like 90% of cases end with an out-of-court settlement or a plea bargain being reached. The legal system is very intricate and slow….but another way to look at it is it is THOROUGH. And, it's democratic….in that some cases (like ours) are fast-tracked, but usually you just have to wait your place in line….because all Americans are in the system together.

• 26. Carpool_Cookie  |  October 2, 2012 at 11:05 am

  But we do not know that the Supreme Court is politicizing anything. We are not party to their conversations, and what their considerations are. They are dealing with other cases, as well.

• 27. Nick  |  October 2, 2012 at 12:46 pm

  Here, Here!

• 28. Mike in Baltimore  |  October 2, 2012 at 12:46 pm

  In other words, SCOTUS took action (rescheduling to a later date the discussion of a case for cert. is taking action, whether anyone wants to agree or not), but no one noticed the action because the action was not what most expected. Everyone was expecting a big, grand, announcement, and when that expected action didn't occur, a lot of people made a lot of ASSumptions.

  And yes, I'm rubbing it in that SCOTUS took action that no one noticed, causing most to ASSume that SCOTUS didn't take any action.

  And remember, I'm NOT an attorney, so when I use the term 'action', I use it as defined in the dictionary (specifically the second definition, below), not in legalese.

  Action
  noun
  1. the process or state of acting or of being active: The machine is not in action now.
  2. something done or performed; act; deed.
  3. an act that one consciously wills and that may be characterized by physical or mental activity

  Remember, many of the people who write comments are NOT attorneys, and could give a flip about some (but not all) of the legalese.

• 29. Mike in Baltimore  |  October 2, 2012 at 4:47 pm

  Federal holidays, which the Supreme Court (as an entity of the Federal Government) observes are:
  October 8 (Columbus Day);
  November 12 (Veterans Day) and November 22 (Thanksgiving);
  December 25 (Christmas Day);
  January 1 (New Year's Day) and January 21 (ML King, Jr. Day) (also, in 2013, Inauguration Day – a local to DC and area holiday due to traffic);
  February 18 (President's Day); and
  May 27 (Memorial Day)

  Federal Holidays are indicated on the Supreme Court Calendar October Term, 2012: http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/2012te…

• 30. Mike in Baltimore  |  October 2, 2012 at 5:20 pm

  Lance,

  If you've done the battle for 40+ years, then you might be getting tired of the fight. Until then, remember that life sucks many times, and for some people more than others. And many times, the longer you have to wait for something, the more you can appreciate it when it arrives.

  And then there are others who started years and decades before Stonewall, and still fight, or fought to the end of their life (Franklin Kameny, for example).

  My partner and the love of my life for more than 20 years died in 2002. All through the 1980s and 1990s, there were times our hopes were pushed way up, only to be dashed – Marion Barry being elected in DC to replace that old dinosaur Walter Washington; the Hawai'i state Supreme Court ruling in 1992, etc. Then came a series of low points – the 1994 elections, the vote in Hawai'i to overturn the state Supreme Court ruling, DADT, DOMA, etc.

  Since my partner's death, marriage equality has become legal in seven jurisdictions (six states and DC), starting with Massachusetts in 2004. Since I'm not now in a relationship, and don't plan to be in another, I could just give up, crawl in a hole and pull it over me. I choose not to, though, and still fight the good fight.

  Will you still be ready and able to fight the good fight in 10, 25, 40 years or more, if necessary?

• 31. DougV  |  October 2, 2012 at 10:16 pm

  Elections should irrelevant to the court. Stupid the court would even consider the effects on the elections.

• 32. Mike in Baltimore  |  October 2, 2012 at 11:17 pm

  And how do you know that they are considering the effects on the elections, DougV?

  Maybe they are doing research on how or why certain parties do or do not have standing before they decide to proceed with the case (any case).

  Will SCOTUS accept the reasoning of the California SC that the proponents of Prop H8 have standing, as the 9th Circuit did? If not, who has standing to defend Prop H8?

  Will SCOTUS determine that BLAG has standing? If not, who has standing to defend DOMA?

  Remember, the question of standing is determined BEFORE the case is heard, as you need someone to argue every side of the case. And at SCOTUS, the question of standing must be established before the Justices decide to take up the case or not, irrespective of any prior court's determination. In fact, some cases reach SCOTUS for the sole purpose of determining who has, and who does not have, standing before a case is heard in a Federal District Court.

  Or do you want SCOTUS to act as a kangaroo court on marriage equality cases, except if they do and their decision is not in accordance with your wishes? Or do you want SCOTUS (to at least appear) to act impartially?

• 33. Stefan  |  October 3, 2012 at 6:39 am

  The standing issue I think is another reason why the Supreme Court will pass on Hollingsworth v Perry. They are usually very strict with that issue, and don't allow just anyone to have standing.

• 34. Nick  |  October 3, 2012 at 7:21 am

  I agree. And it is what I said in my previous post! It is obvious they are politicizing MY HUMAN RIGHTS! They are waiting for the 4 Marriage ballot initiative results! You mark My Words!!!!

• 35. Mike in Baltimore  |  October 3, 2012 at 3:57 pm

  "It is obvious they are politicizing. . . ."

  How is it obvious? You have a direct communication from the Justices that they are politicizing the decision? Or some other proof that the decision is being politicized? ASSumptions and conjecture are NOT proof.

  Or are you going on other people's conjecture that the ONLY reason there has been no decision is that they are politicizing the decision?

  It could be they inadvertently overscheduled cases to consider at conference. It could be they are not certain that all parties to the cases have standing. It could be some other reason, not at all connected to politicizing the cases.

• 36. W. Kevin Vicklund  |  October 4, 2012 at 1:20 pm

  SCOTUSblog has noted that the re-lists have been released. Prop 8, Windsor, and Diaz are not on the re-list. This indicates (but doesn't actually confirm) that the cases are on hold in anticipation of the remaining DOMA cases. Had they been re-listed, it would have meant they needed some extra time to look more closely before deciding whether to grant cert. By holding, it means they want to consider these cases at the same time as they are considering related cases – here, presumably the other DOMA cases.

• 37. Mike in Baltimore  |  October 4, 2012 at 4:41 pm

  Or it could be that they are doing research on some issue (such as status), don't know how long the research will take, and thus are not listing the case(s) for conference until they have some idea of the time frame needed to discuss the case(s).

  Remember, most people KNEW CJ Roberts was an automatic vote against 'Obamacare', no matter how the legality was presented. How did that prediction turn out?

• 38. SHOES THROWER  |  October 7, 2012 at 11:19 am

  It is possible for the Court to reject these specific challenges against DOMA, while leaving open the possibility that DOMA is unconstitutional in other contexts. Likewise, it could uphold Prop. 8 on the basis that it does not affect any other rights of gays and lesbians, while leaving open the possibility that broader amendments such as those in Nebraska and Oklahoma might be unconstitutional for going too far. Such narrow rulings would not doom gay rights litigation in general, or even anti-DOMA litigation.

  On the other hand, the Court could simply rule, full-stop, that the government can choose to favor opposite-sex marriage as it sees fit.

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.