Leave a Comment Jacob Combs
Equality news round-up: will the results from the 4 initiatives affect LGBT rights in the courts?
November 9, 2012
By Scottie Thomaston
The election could impact (or not) LGBT rights in the courts as early as November 20. Below are some perspectives on the question.
- Lyle Denniston (also of SCOTUSBlog) provides his take on the question.
- Here’s more Denniston.
- The San Francisco Chronicle weighs in.
- Here’s a piece on the election and the Supreme Court more broadly, but it discusses LGBT rights.
- Reuters has weighed in as well.
- The New York Times has addressed the question.
- And lastly, PrawfsBlawg.
Having technical problems? E-mail equalityontrial AT couragecampaign DOT org for assistance!
35 Comments Leave a Comment
1.
W. Kevin Vicklund | November 9, 2012 at 12:56 pm
The election results will not have an effect on Prop 8. However, there is a chance that they will have an effect on the DOMA cases. Prior to the election, the only place outside of the 1st and 2nd Circuits that allowed same-sex marriages was Iowa and California. Prior to the election, if SCOTUS decided to deny cert in the DOMA cases (as well as Prop 8), Iowa would have been the only place where a) same-sex marriage was allowed and b) there was no ruling affecting DOMA*. With Maryland and Washington* in the mix, that's five Circuits that DOMA would be affecting, out of eleven. While SCOTUS might have been willing to let the lower decisions stand without acting, knowing that only one state would be in limbo, it is much harder to justify ignoring an issue that affects almost half of the Circuits.
*Golinski so far only affects California, though a decision at the 9th would also affect Washington. [simplification warning]
2.
Seth from Maryland | November 9, 2012 at 1:48 pm
yea i agree, but i do think these election results will make it less likely that the Supreme court will take up the Perry Case
3.
Philip | November 9, 2012 at 2:00 pm
A phenomenal post by Dale Carpenter over at Volokh:
http://www.volokh.com/2012/11/08/winning-minnesot…
4.
Anthony | November 9, 2012 at 3:06 pm
Meaning I am an equal citizen again in 2 weeks!
5.
PDx_Str8_Supporter | November 9, 2012 at 3:41 pm
What's new? Brian is asking for more money…the only reason they lost is that they got outspent $20m in the 4 elections….check out the latest spin over at NOM….
6.
davep | November 9, 2012 at 3:44 pm
…. I just got a bizarre email from NOM. It seems they really are trying hard to convince themselves that this election did not happen the way it did. Here is an actual quote from Brian Brown:
"some advocates on the left and in the media are saying we've lost. It's preposterous!"
Yikes. Get help, Brian. And start looking for a new job. You lost.
7.
Bill S. | November 9, 2012 at 4:04 pm
Not quite…not with DOMA still in force.
8.
John_B_in_DC | November 9, 2012 at 4:42 pm
I think one effect this election is going to have–maybe not immediately, but over the next year or two–is that more and more moderate Republican politicians, pundits and policy makers (the few moderates that are left, anyway) are going to come over to our side, and feel comfortable saying so. Many of them may be on our side already (or could be convinced with the right argument) but knew saying or doing anything in any way favorable to same-sex marriage was the end of their career. Now they know that's not necessarily true, and in fact being pro-equality might be an asset, even a necessity, in some areas.
I hope it will also embolden state legislatures in states that are at or past the tipping point (e.g., Delaware, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Minnesota, Hawaii) to move forward with marriage equality legislation sooner rather than later.
9.
Seth from Maryland | November 9, 2012 at 7:00 pm
Susan Collins
lol, i just know she supports marriage equality and doma repeal , an now that Maine passed marriage equality she finally reveal she's on our side
Gov. Christy maybie
10.
John_B_in_DC | November 9, 2012 at 7:27 pm
I do think Christy may end up flipping, and maybe these victories–along with polls showing a clear majority of NJ residents supporting marriage equality–will nudge him a bit. BTW does the NJ state legislature change at all with this election?
11.
Seth from Maryland | November 9, 2012 at 8:40 pm
After Crucial Wins, Rhode Island Sets Sights On Marriage Equality Law:
Following a pickup of several more LGBT allies in the Rhode Island state legislature, marriage equality advocates are confident their state can pass a law to grant same-sex couples the right to marry.
The general assembly picked up at least four more marriage equality supporters in Tuesday's election, the Associated Press reports. An effort to legalize marriage has also been boosted by voters in Washington, Maryland, and nearby Maine, who decided to allow same-sex couples the right to marry Tuesday night.
12.
Seth from Maryland | November 9, 2012 at 8:41 pm
While there are still some races yet to be decided, the pro-equality impact on the 2012 election was both significant and undeniable,"Fight Back RI campaign director Ray Sullivan said in a statement Tuesday night. "We were proud to stand with those who stand with us and eagerly anticipate working with new and long-time equality supporters from both sides of the aisle when the Assembly returns in January."
Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee has indicated that he would support such a law, and has even declared in May that the state will recognize same-sex couples who were legally married elsewhere as being married in Rhode Island. http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equalit…
13.
Mike in Baltimore | November 9, 2012 at 8:42 pm
NJ state elections are the year following the Presidential election, which means next year.
14.
Seth from Maryland | November 9, 2012 at 8:43 pm
this just keeps getting better and better as time goes along, i have a good feeling about RI
15.
Richard Weatherwax | November 10, 2012 at 9:07 am
Ideally, the Supreme Court is not influenced by public opinion, nor are they concerned with the political ramifications which could result from any particular opinion.
Unfortunately, the ideal is not always the case. Many court rulings have been controversial, and these controversies have influenced voters and elections. It was wise for the Supreme Court to keep away from the issue of marriage equality at a time which was so close to the election. A decision either way would have stirred up the voters and may have resulted in a negative reaction at the polls. A decision in favor of marriage equality would have brought accusations that the Courts ignore the voters (as they should do,) and are making law (as common law courts have done for hundreds of years.)
With the recent election results, a decision in favor of marriage equality can be seen as reflecting the public's position on the issue, and strengthen the prestige of the Court.
16.
John_B_in_DC | November 10, 2012 at 9:10 am
I found this commentary from Brian Brown interesting, as quoted by NOM in their post-election "Brian Brown to SCOTUS: Keep Your Hands Off Marriage!" post (http://www.nomblog.com/30881):
"…it is not clear which side benefited more from those developments [the four marriage referendums] at the Supreme Court.
Supporters of traditional marriage, even as they registered disappointment, said the results showed that the question could be resolved democratically.
“It bolsters our case,” said Brian S. Brown, the president of the National Organization for Marriage. “It’s very difficult to say you need a federal resolution of this question if states are resolving it for themselves.”
So does this mean Brian Brown and NOM are finally taking their own "let the people vote" cries to heart? We need to remind them of this when they start talking about a "federal marriage amendment" to the U.S. Constitution, which would ban same-sex marriage nationwide, even in states that want to allow it, and without any popular vote at all.
17.
Eric | November 10, 2012 at 9:35 am
Some of the authors are factually incorrect when they state that marriage amendments had a clean sweep until now. In 2006, Arizona's Prop 107 lost.
It lost because it also tried to ban domestic partnerships and that would have prevented straight seniors from being able to double dip on Social Security benefits denied to and paid for by same-gender couples.
18.
Steve | November 10, 2012 at 10:30 am
However, they hate groups are wrong when they say that this undercuts a claim to suspect class status. A handful of victories does not make a group "politically powerful"
19.
devon | November 10, 2012 at 12:52 pm
Yesterday the Supreme Court granted 4 petitions for review, including the Voting Rights Act case.
All 4 of the granted cases were scheduled for the conference of November 9.
My understanding of the matter is that the Supreme Court announced the 4 cases granted on the same day as the conference was held.
Does that indicate that the DOMA and Prop 8 cases could be announced as granted or rejected as early as Nov 20?
20.
MightyAcorn | November 10, 2012 at 2:19 pm
Said that about his debate with Dan Savage, too. Maybe we should buy Brian a dictionary, he could be confusing the meaning of "lost" with "loofah" or something.
21.
MightyAcorn | November 10, 2012 at 2:24 pm
Wouldn't it be great if we here in CA had a denial of cert to give thanks for? Fingers crossed.
22.
Anthony | November 10, 2012 at 2:46 pm
Hopefully we can get married here in two weeks!
23.
MightyAcorn | November 10, 2012 at 2:58 pm
That, and pumpkin pie too….wouldn't that be sweet?
24.
MarriedGayChristian | November 10, 2012 at 3:03 pm
NOM's posts are actually so sad they border on funny.
They moderate all my comments away, so I'll just post here instead :-p
They are spewing all sorts of vitriol in their comments sections. ' The gays and their gay-manufactured children, the incestuous gays, the unnatural, aberrant gays, people are born with -heterosexual equipment-.'
I think they are still coming to grips with the fact that the world as they know it changed Tuesday. The USA became a country that allows gays to marry by a vote of the people, in many states. Must have fried their poor lil hate-filled transistors. Naturally, now they are talking about how 6 point losses = barely losing, and how 4 losses means they are winning.
25.
PDx_Str8_Supporter | November 10, 2012 at 4:40 pm
Look at it through Brian's lens (I know, it might be difficult, and it means that this lens will need to be thrown out) –
He is now fighting for his organizations life. He has to "explain" the 4 losses (7, actually, if you include Obama, Wiggins and Grisanti) in terms the people who have donated and will continue to donate to NOM and other organizations can understand. "We outperformed Mitt Romney on all tickets" (Ignore Wiggins (54/46) while Obama was 52/48). We have extreme political headwind – Deep blue states, outspent 4-1, 6-1, 8-1, yadda yadda yadda.
I am going to go out on a limb here, but I don't think that 2013 is going to be a great year in terms of incoming donations for NOM. I am hoping that 2014 is an even worse year.
From the other side, I am hoping that the "dump Starbucks" campaign was Starbucks' Pearl Harbor – the shot that "awoke the sleeping giant". I am incredibly amazed at the generosity of individuals and corporations in these battles, and hope that the lessons learned as well as the funding continue for future battles.
I am also hopeful that the battle for equality is going to be a short one – we will know more Nov. 26th.
26.
John_B_in_DC | November 10, 2012 at 7:40 pm
According to this article, in some parts of Maryland, but especially the most heavily Republican districts, Question 6 got MORE votes than Obama did:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/walter-olson/maryla…
27.
Mark | November 10, 2012 at 9:06 pm
Agree. I suspect it's inconvenient and clunky for writers to include that in their pieces. "32 times it was voted down, etc". But it's true that it did lose in 2006…I remember it quite well. It was significant as it was the first pro-gay win and it was Arizona.
28.
Seth from Maryland | November 10, 2012 at 9:51 pm
i just read the illinois democrats have won supermajorities in the Legislature, lol
29.
John_B_in_DC | November 12, 2012 at 7:20 am
One result of this election may be that money is a lot harder for NOM to come by. They spent hundreds of thousands in this election and have virtually nothing to show for it. Since they have relatively few donors (most of whom give them rather large amounts), losing even one or two of them could set them back quite a bit.
30.
devon | November 12, 2012 at 7:52 am
Robert Barnes wrote today in the Washington Post that consideration of DOMA and prop 8 has been moved to the November 30 supreme court conference.
I haven't seen the conference date change mentioned anywhere else.
31.
W. Kevin Vicklund | November 12, 2012 at 8:52 am
I suspect a typo rather than a change from the 20th.
32.
Anthony | November 12, 2012 at 10:11 am
Pretty sure that's a typo
33.
Juli | November 12, 2012 at 2:04 pm
That's true Mark, Arizona did not pass their anit-gay marriage amendment, because that version was too extreme. So they toned it down and at the next election, it passed. But I agree that NOM is disingenuous when they say they've always won at the ballot. It failed first in AZ, then it succeeded.
34.
Mike in Baltimore | November 12, 2012 at 11:50 pm
Or maybe SCOTUS was waiting for another DOMA case to be appealed to the court (which happened), not necessarily waiting for an election to pass. After all, ObamaCare was argued before the court during the 2011-12 session, and the decision was announced just over four months prior to the election.
Do you think most American voters would more readily recognize the Prop H8 case over the ObamaCare case? If so, then the 'wait until after the election' excuse would hold water. But I'd wager that there are many more who would have an opinion on ObamaCare than those who would have an opinion on Prop H8 or DOMA.
35.
Mike in Baltimore | November 13, 2012 at 12:01 am
Quite true.
Anne Arundel and Frederick Counties voted FOR Question 6, and also voted for Robme.
Both are considered GOTP territory (AA County especially), but they have been trending Democratic over the decades (except AA Co. when Boobie Ehrlich is on the ballot). (If you can't tell, I really, really, really … don't like Boobie Ehrlich. VBG.)
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.