Comments on: Supreme Court appoints lawyer to argue that neither House Republicans nor the Justice Department have legal standing in DOMA case

By: Equality On Trial » Supreme Court to hear extended argument in DOMA case

Equality On Trial » Supreme Court to hear extended argument in DOMA case — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 14:37:21 +0000

[...] to address some initial questions related to Article III standing and jurisdiction. And the Court appointed an outside attorney as amicus curiae to take the position that the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG) who is [...]

By: Pedro

Pedro — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 12:07:14 +0000

When I originally commented I clicked the “Notify me when new comments are added” checkbox
and now each time a comment is added I get several e-mails
with the same comment. Is there any way you can remove people from that service?
Many thanks!

By: Equality On Trial » DOMA: Response briefs to Court-appointed amicus filed today in United States v. Windsor

Fri, 22 Feb 2013 19:38:52 +0000

[...] to the Court-appointed amicus in United States v. Windsor are starting to come in. The Court appointed an attorney to argue against jurisdiction and Article III standing in the challenge to Section 3 of DOMA, since the [...]

By: Equality On Trial » Court-appointed attorney files amicus brief in Edith Windsor’s DOMA case on jurisdiction and standing

Fri, 25 Jan 2013 01:59:06 +0000

[...] Court-appointed attorney – Professor Victoria C. Jackson – has filed her brief in United States v. Windsor. [...]

By: Prop 8 Trial Tracker » Here’s where things currently stand on DOMA and Prop 8 at the Supreme Court

Tue, 08 Jan 2013 18:23:56 +0000

[...] is defending the law on behalf of House Republicans has Article III standing to do so. The Court appointed an outside attorney to argue against the Court’s authority to hear the Justice Department’s claims and against BLAG’s [...]

By: Prop 8 Trial Tracker » Supreme Court will hear marriage cases on March 26 and March 27

Mon, 07 Jan 2013 18:11:06 +0000

[...] when the Court appointed an outside lawyer to argue against the Court’s jurisdiction in the DOMA case, there was speculation that [...]

By: Prop 8 Trial Tracker » Supreme Court sets briefing schedule in DOMA case

Prop 8 Trial Tracker » Supreme Court sets briefing schedule in DOMA case — Tue, 18 Dec 2012 21:36:50 +0000

[...] agreement with the decision below deprives the Court of jurisdiction to hear the case, the Court recently appointed an attorney to argue as amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) against jurisdiction. Her brief [...]

By: Larry

Larry — Wed, 12 Dec 2012 14:36:31 +0000

Would it have helped if Schwarzenegger and/or Brown had defended Prop 8 ineffectually? Before the Justice Department changed positions, they were criticized for homophobic briefs supporting DOMA.

Now the Justice Department is technically defending and appealing DOMA (because they were injured by the decision striking DOMA down) while at the same time arguing it's unconstitutional. The Supreme Court seems to have seen through this and is asking why the Justice Department would have standing if they think the law is unconstitutional and essentially won at the lower level. I imagine SCOTUS would be doing the same if Governor Brown was defending Prop 8 in court while saying he thought it was unconstitutional.

By: nicksternet

nicksternet — Wed, 12 Dec 2012 14:16:06 +0000

This is an absolute travesty of justice and a joke. I stand by my original comment. Jerry Moonbeam is to blame. He should have defended the stupid law, and Olson and Boies are responsible, as well, for not consulting with Monnbeam about standing! So much for the 'smart" attorneys on our side!

By: JimF

JimF — Wed, 12 Dec 2012 14:01:59 +0000

Are we supposed to pretend that all of the justices have not already made up their minds about how they're going to rule?