UP NEXT
03
Protesters on both sides of the issue gathered in front of the Supreme Court as oral arguments began on a collection of gay marriage cases. H. Darr Beiser, USA TODAY
Same-sex marriage supporter Vin Testa, of Washington, D.C., waves a rainbow pride flag in front of the Supreme Court on Tuesday morning.(Photo: Drew Angerer, Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court began hearing arguments today in a case that could change the face of marriage nationwide.
The justices' eventual ruling on the case — actually six cases consolidated from Ohio, Michigan, Tennessee and Kentucky — will determine whether same-sex marriage becomes legal nationwide, or whether states retain the authority to ban it. A decision is expected by late June.
During the first part of today's argument, lawyers for the gay and lesbian plaintiffs and the Obama administration were prepared to argue that marriage is a fundamental right for opposite-sex and same-sex couples alike. They also planned to argue that the 14th Amendment guarantees gay couples the same rights as others.
Lawyers for the four states planned to counter that Supreme Court precedent, states' rights and the best interests of opposite-sex couples and children are among the reasons why the same-sex marriage bans should be allowed to remain in place.
The high court challenge to states' gay marriage bans is destined to make even more of an indelible mark on history than the two cases decided by the court in 2013 — United States v. Windsor, which forced the federal government to recognize gay marriages, and Hollingsworth v. Perry, which made California the 13th state to allow them when the justices refused to intercede.
Those rulings did not resolve the threshold questions in the debate: whether gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry, or whether states have the right to ban the practice.
The court sidestepped the issue last October, when it let stand appeals court rulings striking down gay marriage bans in Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, Oklahoma and Utah. Those rulings and a later appeals court decision affecting Idaho and Nevada drew in neighboring states as well. As a result, more than 70% of Americans now live in states where gay marriages are legal, and tens of thousands of couples have tied the knot.
But in November, Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton issued a 42-page appellate decision in which he said lower court judges' hands are tied by a one-sentence Supreme Court ruling in 1972 that he said "upheld the right of the people of a state to define marriage as they see it."
Same-sex marriage supporter Ryan Aquilina, of Washington, DC, holds a sign outside the Supreme Court Tuesday. (Photo: Drew Angerer, Getty Images)
The swing vote on the court is Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has authored the last three major rulings advancing the cause of gay rights. On one hand, he has defended voter-approved constitutional amendments, most recently in a Michigan case last year that upheld the state's ban against racial preferences in university admissions. But he wrote the 2013 opinion striking down the federal same-sex marriage ban as an affront to the constitutional rights of gays and lesbians.
While it took a decade after Massachusetts first legalized same-sex marriage in 2003 for the first dozen states to follow suit, the 2013 rulings ignited a second wave. In the last year alone, the number of gay-marriage states has more than doubled from 17 to 37.
The 32 plaintiffs in the six cases consolidated before the court illustrate virtually every problem faced by gay and lesbian couples who can't marry or have their marriages recognized, from cradle to grave.
For New Yorkers Joseph Vitale and Robert Talmas, it's keeping both their names on the birth certificate of their adopted son Cooper, who was born in Ohio. Cooper, at 2 the youngest of the plaintiffs, is listed as "Adopted Child Doe" in court papers.
For Cincinnati's Jim Obergefell, it's keeping his name on the death certificate of his late husband John Arthur, who died of Lou Gehrig's disease in 2013. That matters for federal death and disability benefits but, Obergefell says, "It isn't about the money."
For other couples in the case, potential problems are mounting. Tennessee's Valeria Tanco and Sophy Jesty just had their first child last month by artificial insemination. Michigan's April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse recently adopted their fourth child, two of whom have disabilities.
Nearly 140 briefs have been filed on both sides of the issue. The Justice Department has come down on the side of gay marriage; Solicitor General Donald Verrilli helped to argue the case. Major business and military leaders are backing gay marriage; religious leaders and a majority of Republican officials support the bans.
While gay marriage proponents have had the bigger megaphone, opponents fought to get their message across.They contended that permitting same-sex marriage could lead to a decline in heterosexual marriage rates, more children raised by single parents -- even more abortions.
Any ruling for gay challengers would make same-sex marriage legal nationwide, adding 13 states to the 37 that already permit it. Two more numbers would rise as well — the number of gay marriages, and the number of challenges from opponents claiming religious objections.
A ruling in favor of the four Midwestern states could lead some of the 22 states in which federal courts struck down gay marriage bans to seek their reinstatement. Eleven states that legalized it legislatively and four where state courts made the call would not be immediately affected.
Gay marriage, state by state: Key rulings
Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/1zjKR1E
USA NOW
Damage in Baltimore as rioters set fires, loot stores
Apr 28, 2015
UP NEXT
03
]]>
Protesters on both sides of the issue gathered in front of the Supreme Court as oral arguments began on a collection of gay marriage cases. H. Darr Beiser, USA TODAY
Same-sex marriage supporter Vin Testa, of Washington, D.C., waves a rainbow pride flag in front of the Supreme Court on Tuesday morning.(Photo: Drew Angerer, Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court began hearing arguments today in a case that could change the face of marriage nationwide.
The justices' eventual ruling on the case — actually six cases consolidated from Ohio, Michigan, Tennessee and Kentucky — will determine whether same-sex marriage becomes legal nationwide, or whether states retain the authority to ban it. A decision is expected by late June.
During the first part of today's argument, lawyers for the gay and lesbian plaintiffs and the Obama administration were prepared to argue that marriage is a fundamental right for opposite-sex and same-sex couples alike. They also planned to argue that the 14th Amendment guarantees gay couples the same rights as others.
Lawyers for the four states planned to counter that Supreme Court precedent, states' rights and the best interests of opposite-sex couples and children are among the reasons why the same-sex marriage bans should be allowed to remain in place.
The high court challenge to states' gay marriage bans is destined to make even more of an indelible mark on history than the two cases decided by the court in 2013 — United States v. Windsor, which forced the federal government to recognize gay marriages, and Hollingsworth v. Perry, which made California the 13th state to allow them when the justices refused to intercede.
Those rulings did not resolve the threshold questions in the debate: whether gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry, or whether states have the right to ban the practice.
The court sidestepped the issue last October, when it let stand appeals court rulings striking down gay marriage bans in Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, Oklahoma and Utah. Those rulings and a later appeals court decision affecting Idaho and Nevada drew in neighboring states as well. As a result, more than 70% of Americans now live in states where gay marriages are legal, and tens of thousands of couples have tied the knot.
But in November, Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton issued a 42-page appellate decision in which he said lower court judges' hands are tied by a one-sentence Supreme Court ruling in 1972 that he said "upheld the right of the people of a state to define marriage as they see it."
Same-sex marriage supporter Ryan Aquilina, of Washington, DC, holds a sign outside the Supreme Court Tuesday. (Photo: Drew Angerer, Getty Images)
The swing vote on the court is Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has authored the last three major rulings advancing the cause of gay rights. On one hand, he has defended voter-approved constitutional amendments, most recently in a Michigan case last year that upheld the state's ban against racial preferences in university admissions. But he wrote the 2013 opinion striking down the federal same-sex marriage ban as an affront to the constitutional rights of gays and lesbians.
While it took a decade after Massachusetts first legalized same-sex marriage in 2003 for the first dozen states to follow suit, the 2013 rulings ignited a second wave. In the last year alone, the number of gay-marriage states has more than doubled from 17 to 37.
The 32 plaintiffs in the six cases consolidated before the court illustrate virtually every problem faced by gay and lesbian couples who can't marry or have their marriages recognized, from cradle to grave.
For New Yorkers Joseph Vitale and Robert Talmas, it's keeping both their names on the birth certificate of their adopted son Cooper, who was born in Ohio. Cooper, at 2 the youngest of the plaintiffs, is listed as "Adopted Child Doe" in court papers.
For Cincinnati's Jim Obergefell, it's keeping his name on the death certificate of his late husband John Arthur, who died of Lou Gehrig's disease in 2013. That matters for federal death and disability benefits but, Obergefell says, "It isn't about the money."
For other couples in the case, potential problems are mounting. Tennessee's Valeria Tanco and Sophy Jesty just had their first child last month by artificial insemination. Michigan's April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse recently adopted their fourth child, two of whom have disabilities.
Nearly 140 briefs have been filed on both sides of the issue. The Justice Department has come down on the side of gay marriage; Solicitor General Donald Verrilli helped to argue the case. Major business and military leaders are backing gay marriage; religious leaders and a majority of Republican officials support the bans.
While gay marriage proponents have had the bigger megaphone, opponents fought to get their message across.They contended that permitting same-sex marriage could lead to a decline in heterosexual marriage rates, more children raised by single parents -- even more abortions.
Any ruling for gay challengers would make same-sex marriage legal nationwide, adding 13 states to the 37 that already permit it. Two more numbers would rise as well — the number of gay marriages, and the number of challenges from opponents claiming religious objections.
A ruling in favor of the four Midwestern states could lead some of the 22 states in which federal courts struck down gay marriage bans to seek their reinstatement. Eleven states that legalized it legislatively and four where state courts made the call would not be immediately affected.
Gay marriage, state by state: Key rulings
Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/1zjKR1E
USA NOW
Damage in Baltimore as rioters set fires, loot stores
Apr 28, 2015
0) { %>
Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1DT5TiQ
0 comments:
Post a Comment