KABC-TV Channel 7, Los Angeles (ABC 7) - Friday, November 7, 2012

Supreme Court takes up gay marriage cases

By Robert Holquin

WASHINGTON (KABC) -- Supreme Court announced on Friday it will take up gay marriage cases, including Proposition 8, California's ban on same-sex unions. While gay couples are hopeful they will soon be able to wed, supporters of the ban say they hope this will end the fight once and for all.

The justices said they will review a federal appeals court ruling that struck down Prop. 8, though on narrow grounds. The San Francisco-based appeals court said the state could not take away the same-sex marriage right that had been granted by California's Supreme Court.

"Today's decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to consider marriage equality takes our nation one step closer to realizing the American ideal of equal protection under the law for all people," Attorney General Kamala D. Harris said in a statement. "For justice to prevail, Proposition 8 must be invalidated so that gay and lesbian families are finally treated with equality and dignity."

The court also will decide whether Congress can deprive legally married gay couples of federal benefits otherwise available to married people. A provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act limits a range of health and pension benefits, as well as favorable tax treatment, to heterosexual couples.

"Whatever the outcome, it's a very exciting day to have the court looking at our families and rights under the law and our equal dignity and worth," said Tara Borelli, attorney for Lambda Legal, a gay rights organization.

The Supreme Court is heavily divided, and the swing vote may come down to Justice Anthony Kennedy, a native Californian and Reagan appointee.

"I expect four or five justices to uphold Proposition 8. Why? Because the constitution of the United States doesn't have marriage in it," said Randy Thomasson, a spokesman for SaveCalifornia.com, which opposes gay marriage. "The 10th Amendment says what's not in the federal powers belongs to the states."

The high court could start hearing arguments as early as March and could make a ruling by June.

Gay marriage is legal, or will be soon, in nine states - Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, Washington - and the District of Columbia.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

U.S. Supreme Court to take up Same-Sex Marriage

Whew! It's a court case! For a minute there I thought Sotomayor and Alito were going to tie the knot.

But this is an extremely important case. I think there are three possible outcomes, all of which will have importance repercussions:

1) The High Court might rule that the majority can or cannot deny same-sex couples to marry. [For instance, the majority cannot deprive blacks or interracial couples from the right to get married.] This narrow ruling would decide if California's Proposition 8, which a majority of California voters approved, prohibits same-sex marriage. Should the High Court rule the Proposition unconstitutional, state legislatures would still have to approve same-sex marriage.

2) The High Court might rule that a majority of voters do have the right to prohibit same-sex marriage in their state.

3) The High Court might rule that since all states allow heterosexual marriages, they must also allow same-sex marriages.

I don't knoow how important it is. I think that, at best, it's a rearguard, delaying action by rightwing reactionaries. If you look at the growth of votes and poll results in favor of same sex marriage, it seems like it's just a matter of time before it becomes part of the norm.

It's an important case. This is the first time the U.S. Supreme Court has ever taken up same-sex marriage.

They can rule narrowly regarding if a state can or cannot prohibit same-sex marriage, or they can rule widely and say that same-sex couples in all states have a right to marry under the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment "Equal Protection" clause.

4) They'll find wiggle room and render another non-decision.

Exactly, oskar ~ I know from spending my whole working life at a major law firm that regularly appeared in the USSC that interpreting constitutional law is astoundingly complex ~ think in terms of the ankle bone is connected to the shin bone, the shin bone is connected to the knee bone, etc ~ the issues the USSC has agreed to hear ARE very important core issues ~ but the USSC is still chafing from the controversy created with the ObamaCare ruling and has left itself an escape hatch for the gay marriage hearings ~ it is only hearing arguments on selectively identified parts of DOMA and the general concept of "states' rights" ~ so instead of ruling on the merits, the Court can toss the cases on procedural grounds ~

Sooz

It depends on the precise nature of the arguments presented, as well, IMO.