This is sooner than I expected, but I'm choosing to believe that the USSC won't do anything now to intentionally further erode its reputation ~ we'll see ~ Sooz

Supreme Court to consider appeals from five states that challenge same-sex marriage rights
By Agence France-Presse
Saturday, September 13, 2014 9:21 EDT

The US Supreme Court this week made plans to revisit gay marriage, less than 15 months after its landmark decision that same-sex couples were entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals.

While courts across the United States have been hearing gay-marriage cases, the Supreme Court said it will use a September 29 private conference to consider appeals that concern whether gay marriage can be legal in some states but not in others.

The justices will weigh cases from five states — Indiana, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin and Oklahoma — in which bans on same-sex marriage were deemed unconstitutional.

Whether for or against gay marriage, concerned US parties seem to be forming a consensus on at least one point: it’s time for the Supreme Court to decide.

“It’s crystal-clear that the court needs to take up the freedom to marry issue again,” said James Esseks, from the American Civil Liberties Union.

On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court made history by invalidating parts of the Defense of Marriage Act, which restricted marriage to heterosexual couples.

As a result, the federal government was allowed to recognize same-sex couples in all federal matters, such as sharing pension benefits.

But the nine justices left it to each state to decide whether to legalize gay marriage. To date, 19 of the 50 US states, plus the capital Washington, have legalized the practice.

- Awaiting ‘further court action’ -

But can a state explicitly prohibit gay marriage, as 31 have done?

In Utah and Virginia, where lower courts have struck down the state bans, the Supreme Court has blocked couples from marrying as it weighs whether to legalize the unions nationwide.

That means “same-sex couples and their families await further court action for full vindication,” said Elizabeth Wydra, a lawyer with the Constitutional Accountability Center (CAC).

But, said David Cruz, a law professor at the University of Southern California, “if the Court were simply to deny review in all these cases, then the stays would be lifted and tens of millions of people would then be living in marriage equality states.”

For Lyle Denniston, an expert from specialist website ScotusBlog, “the same-sex marriage controversy has developed at uncommon speed” since the Supreme Court’s decision last summer.

The high court could say as soon as September 30 — one day after the justices’ private conference — whether it will take up any of the cases from the five states and make a ruling in June 2015.

But the justices could also hold off weighing in, waiting to see if a federal appeals court somewhere rules gay marriage bans are legal.

“The justices have more difficulty denying a certiorari petition (to come before the Supreme Court) when the appellate courts disagree, because that means there would be different legal rules governing marriage equality in different regions of the US,” Carl Tobias, law professor at the University of Richmond told AFP.

But Cruz said he doesn’t believe the top court will wait.

“It seems increasingly unlikely that the Justices on the court would let so many pages of history be written without their input.”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/09/13/supreme-court-to-consider-appeals-from-five-states-that-challenge-same-sex-marriage-rights/

This is HUGE, and excellent, news!!! ~ Sooz

BREAKING: SCOTUS Denies Appeals On Gay Marriage From 5 States
By MARK SHERMAN Published October 6, 2014, 9:58 AM EDT

By declining to take up gay marriage in the current term, the Supreme Court left intact lower court decisions legalizing gay marriage and cleared the way for same-sex marriage in 30 states and the District of Columbia.

The justices on Monday did not comment in rejecting appeals from Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin.

The court's order immediately ends delays on marriage in those states. Couples in six other states should be able to get married in short order.

That would make same-sex marriage legal in 30 states and the District of Columbia.

But the justices have left unresolved for now the question of same-sex marriage nationwide.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/scotus-denies-appeals-gay-marriage

Here's an UPDATE with more info ~ Sooz

SCOTUS Denies Appeals On Gay Marriage From 5 States
By MARK SHERMAN Published October 6, 2014, 9:58 AM EDT

By declining to take up gay marriage in the current term, the Supreme Court left intact lower court decisions legalizing gay marriage and cleared the way for same-sex marriage in 30 states and the District of Columbia.

The justices on Monday did not comment in rejecting appeals from Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin. No other state cases were currently pending with the high court, but the justices stopped short of resolving for now the question of same-sex marriage nationwide.

The court's order immediately ends delays on marriage in those states. Couples in six other states — Colorado, Kansas, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia and Wyoming — should be able to get married in short order. Those states would be bound by the same appellate rulings that were put on hold pending the Supreme Court's review.

That would make same-sex marriage legal in 30 states and the District of Columbia.

Experts and advocates on both sides of the issue believed the justices would step in and decide gay marriage cases this term.

The justices have an obligation to settle an issue of such national importance, not abdicate that responsibility to lower court judges, the advocates said. Opting out of hearing the cases leaves those lower court rulings in place.

Two other appeals courts, in Cincinnati and San Francisco, could issue decisions any time in same-sex marriage cases. Judges in the Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit who are weighing pro-gay marriage rulings in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee, appeared more likely to rule in favor of state bans than did the 9th Circuit judges in San Francisco, who are considering Idaho and Nevada restrictions on marriage.

It takes just four of the nine justices to vote to hear a case, but it takes a majority of at least five for an eventual ruling. Monday's opaque order did not indicate how the justices voted on whether to hear the appeals.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/scotus-denies-appeals-gay-marriage

And here's "the fly in the ointment" ~ ~ Sooz

The Good—And Bad—News In SCOTUS Refusing To Hear Gay Marriage Cases
By Sahil Kapur Published October 6, 2014, 11:51 AM EDT

The Supreme Court dropped a bombshell on Monday morning by announcing it won't hear any of the same-sex marriage cases before them, which means gay couples can marry without delay in Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin and Indiana.

After the justices made their move, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, the first appellate court to find a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, quickly lifted the stay on its June ruling legalizing gay marriage in Utah.

The move is also good news for same-sex couples in six other states: North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, Colorado, Kansas, Wyoming. They won't be able to marry just yet, but they can sue for that right, and lower courts in each of those states are bound by the pro-gay-marriage rulings of appeals courts.

That would bring legal gay marriage to 30 states and the District of Columbia. For that reason, the Supreme Court's move is a "victory for marriage equality," said Erwin Chemerinsky, the Dean of UC-Irvine law school.

"Next we'll see LGBT couples asking courts that have ruled in favor of marriage equality to lift the existing stays that prevent them from marrying," said Adam Winkler, a law professor at UCLA law school. "The justices are happy to allow this issue to percolate in the lower courts until there is a circuit split."

But the Supreme Court's decision to stay out of the issue is bad news for gay couples in states like Texas, Mississippi and Tennessee, which may now have to wait longer before they can marry. Cases are pending before the conservative-leaning 5th and 6th Circuits, which observers see as the likeliest venues for a split that could force Supreme Court action.

"If there is a circuit split I think that is much more likely they take a case, and a 5th (and or 6th) Circuit split seems fairly likely," Rick Hasen, a law professor at UC-Irvine law school, said in an email.

If one or both circuits issue a decision upholding bans on gay marriage by January, the Supreme Court could still take the case and resolve the issue by next June. If not, couples in other states may have to wait longer to be able to marry.

"[M]arriage equality still does not exist in many states and it is hard to understand what the Court thinks is gained by waiting for a Circuit split here rather than it resolving the issue for the nation," Chemerinsky said.

The court's order on Monday means there were fewer than four votes to hear any of the same-sex marriage cases. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said last month that "there will be some urgency" for the Supreme Court to act if the 6th Circuit (which heard oral arguments last month) rules against gay marriage, but if it rules for gay couples there is "no need for us to rush."

Opponents of gay marriage saw hope in the Supreme Court's move.

"The court's decision not to take up this issue now means that the marriage battle will continue. Several federal courts — including those in the 5th, 6th, 8th, and 11th circuits — still have cases working their way to the Supreme Court," said Byron Babione, senior counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian group. "The people should decide this issue, not the courts."

This article was updated at 12:28 p.m. ET to mention Utah's order lifting the stay.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/supreme-court-refuses-to-hear-gay-marriage

According to my local NBC station, weddings began almost immediately following the USSC announcement ~ Sooz

Supreme Court indirectly advances marriage equality
10/06/14 12:25 PM—Updated 10/06/14 03:35 PM
By Steve Benen

Ordinarily, we think of the Supreme Court making historic news with a landmark ruling, but once in a great while, the high court produces a breakthrough by saying nothing at all.

In the wake of last year’s decision striking down the Defense of Marriage Act, the federal courts have cleared the way for marriage equality in much of the country, including pro-marriage rulings in several federal appellate courts. Each of the rulings was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the thinking was the justices might take up one or more of the cases, ruling once and for all on the issue of same-sex marriage.

This morning, however, the high court announced it wouldn’t hear – in the parlance, it denied cert – any of the cases, which allowed the lower court rulings to stand. That’s a bigger deal than one might expect. Emma Margolin reported this morning:


But as a practical matter, it doesn’t much matter to the millions of families living in the affected states – as long as more same-sex couples are going to enjoy equal civil rights and be treated with dignity by their own government, the justices’ motivations are irrelevant.

With additional rulings pending from the 6th and 9th Circuits, Mark Joseph Stern raises the intriguing possibility that the Supreme Court may never weigh in because it may not be necessary: “If no circuit court ever rules against gay marriage, the gay marriage question will be effectively settled, and the Supreme Court will never have to wade in again. It may be that the justices are hoping the lower courts rule uniformly on the issue – thereby making United States v. Windsor stand for a fundamental constitutional right for gay couples to marry.”

As always, Pete Williams’ on-the-spot reporting is worth your time: [video accessible via the end link]

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/supreme-court-indirectly-advances-marriage-equality

My take on it is this- even the justices who would love to undo it realize you can't put the genie back in the bottle. They also realize how hard it would be to say that the states who have affirmed it were wrong, and to take away the civil rights that were enacted. Therefore, the only thing they can do is try not to put their stamp on it, avoid the question, and let others take the heat.

SCOTUS doesn't want to touch that one with a barge pole.

I will never understand why some people are so threatened by marriage equality ~ ~ there are "live links" to more/corroborating information in the original ~ Sooz

This Is The Most Offensive Response To The Supreme Court’s Expansion Of Marriage Equality
by Ian Millhiser Posted on October 7, 2014 at 12:18 pm

The Supreme Court’s gradual embrace of marriage equality is “a slow-motion Dred Scott for the twenty-first century” according to the conservative National Review. Dred Scott was a Supreme Court decision from shortly before the Civil War, which justified slavery on the grounds that people of African descent “had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order” who are “so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” Marriage equality, by contrast, is the idea that people should be able to marry the person that they love.

The comparison between gay rights and a legacy of human bondage that reduced millions of innocents into mere property was made by Matthew J. Franck, a political scientist with the anti-gay Witherspoon Institute and a regular contributor to the National Review. Witherspoon helped fund a discredited study on parenting by gay and straight couples that opponents of gay rights used in an attempt to convince convince courts to rule against marriage equality. Although this study was published in a scholarly journal, the journal conducted an internal audit reevaluating the study after it became the subject of widespread criticism. That audit eventually concluded that the study was “bullshit.”

Franck’s suggestion that treating all couples with equal dignity is similar to forcing human beings into a life where their spouse or children can be sold away at the whim of a white master came as part of a larger piece about the Supreme Court’s decision not to consider several marriage equality cases. After labeling legal arguments for equality “rhetorical twaddle,” Franck concludes with an appeal to the Republican Party’s history:


By “human liberty” and “the sanctity of the family,” of course, Franck appears to mean that families should be denied the opportunity to unite under a marriage.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/10/07/3576918/top-conservative-magazine-compares-marriage-equality-to-slavery-a-slow-motion-dred-scott/

Interesting that religiosos have removed their god from their arguments. Reckon he was getting harder to sell?

+5 [when Arizona, Montana and Alaska are included] ~ they're beginning to fall like dominos ~ ~ Sooz

Marriage equality bans in Idaho and Nevada struck down by federal appeals court
Reuters | 07 Oct 2014

Legal momentum for extending U.S. marriage rights to same-sex couples accelerated on Tuesday as a federal appeals court in San Francisco struck down bans on gay matrimony in Idaho and Nevada a day after the U.S. Supreme Court let stand similar rulings for five other states.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled the bans in Idaho and Nevada violated the constitution and said they cannot be enforced, adding to a mounting list of states where same-sex unions are now legal.

The ruling binds all states in the court’s region including three that do not permit gay marriage, Arizona, Montana and Alaska, putting the United States on track for legalized gay marriage in 35 states.

Legal pressure mounted for further expansion of marriage rights in the wake of Monday’s Supreme Court decision that ended bans in five states but left intact 20 others.

The response in the five states directly affected by Monday’s ruling has been immediate. On Tuesday morning, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago issued orders that put into effect an earlier ruling that struck down bans in Wisconsin and Indiana. Gay marriages have already gone ahead in Virginia, Utah and Oklahoma.

Marriage equality advocates in Florida also filed a motion asking a federal judge on Tuesday to lift a stay and allow same-sex marriages to go ahead. Three same-sex couples in South Carolina say they plan to apply for licenses on Wednesday and if denied will file lawsuits against the state.

The Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is due to rule at any time in cases involving four states that currently ban gay marriage. Separately, appeals in cases in which district court judges struck down bans in Texas and Louisiana are pending before the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Gay marriage advocates say the Supreme Court sent a clear message by allowing bans to be struck down. “It just became a lot harder for any court to uphold a marriage ban,” said Camilla Taylor, a lawyer for the gay rights group Lambda Legal.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Monday to rule on whether states can ban gay marriage, but rejected appeals to uphold the ban in the five states.

As a result, the high court left intact lower-court rulings striking down those bans, raising the number of states permitting gay marriage from 19 to 24.

Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe signed an order on Tuesday directing state authorities to comply with the Supreme Court decision.

Colorado’s attorney general also told county clerks to begin issuing marriage licenses to gay couples after the state Supreme Court lifted stays in two related cases.

“It feels good to be recognized for things that everyone else takes for granted,” said Carolanne Fisher, who received her license on Tuesday at the county clerk’s office in Boulder, Colorado.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida filed a motion on Tuesday asking U.S. District Judge Robert L. Hinkle to lift a stay he imposed in August on his own ruling that struck down Florida’s gay marriage ban. In his ruling Hinkle cited pending cases in other states before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Howard Simon, the executive director of the ACLU of Florida, urged state Attorney General Pam Bondi to take heed of the high court decision.

“Any further attempt to prevent historical and legal change is fruitless,” he said.

Florida Governor Rick Scott said Bondi had a “duty” to defend the ban, which was added to the state constitution by voters in 2008.

“This is a matter that will be decided by the courts,” he said.

In South Carolina officials also stood their ground. “Until the courts rule on the matter, South Carolina will seek to uphold our state constitution,” Attorney General Alan Wilson said on Tuesday in a statement.

(Reporting by Dan Levine and Kristina Cooke; Additonal reporting by Lawrence Hurley in Washington, Harriet McLeod in South Carolina, Keith Coffman in Boulder and Zachary Fagenson in Miami; Writing by David Adams and Steve Gorman; Editing by Doina Chiacu and Jim Loney)

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/10/marriage-equality-bans-in-idaho-and-nevada-struck-down-by-federal-appeals-court/

Ok. Enough already with long considerations by court systems all over the country and SCOTUS. Expensive appeals with taxpayer $$. It's apparent that a majority of the country and the courts want people to be able to get married, no matter their sexual orientation.

It's time for a federal law along the lines of the Disability Act to end this charade! Move on to more important issues facing the country.

I don't disagree with you, roseanne ~ but I canNOT imagine the far-right even allowing that law to come to a vote ~ and especially not close to election time [which, technically, is every 2 years] ~

Sooz

The Dems might want to consider announcing that if they get a majority in the House and Senate, that will be the first item on the legislative agenda.
A bit of boldness and a direct approach could very well give them the majority they need.

This is a solid sum-up of where things stand ~ Sooz

AlterNet / By Steven Rosenfeld
U.S. Supreme Court Unleashed a Legal Tidal Wave Sweeping Away Same-Sex Marriage Bans
But persistent barriers to marriage equality remain in many states.

October 8, 2014 | The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Monday sustaining lower court rulings that struck down same-sex marriage bans in five states has created a judicial earthquake that is still shaking out. Other judges have subsequently ruled that marriage bans in other states must fall—although the nation’s highest Court put one of those rulings on hold.

Within hours of the Monday ruling, couples in five states—Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin—started seeking licenses and getting married. The high Court’s ruling came as a surprise, because LGBT advocates and other observers expected the Supreme Court to hold another trial to finally settle the marriage equality issue.

In the short run, the Court’s decision meant that 24 states plus the District of Columbia now allow same-sex marriage. But because of the way that the federal court system is stuctured and works—where a decision about an issue in one federal court jurisdiction, or circuit, also affects other states in that same circuit—the Supreme Court also triggered a judicial shockwave. Its action on Monday prompted federal and state judges in places where lawsuits challenging those bans have been slowly unfolding to jump ahead and overturn legal barriers to same-sex marriage.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which covers California and other western states, struck down marriage bans in Idaho and Nevada. But on Thursday, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who oversees the Ninth Circuit, granted Idaho a temporary reprieve and ordered the state’s lawyers to file its arguments by Thursday. That delay means that it might only be a few more days until the Supreme Court overturns Idaho’s same-sex marriage ban.

Meanwhile, on Wednesday in Johnson County, Kansas, which is where Kansas City and its suburbs are located, Chief District Judge Kevin Moriarty issued an order directing his clerks and other court judges to start issuing marriage licenses without fear of being sued under other state laws, including a constitutional amendment passed in 2005 banning same-sex marriages. KansasCity.com reported that clerks in other counties refused to do likewise after the state agency overseeing state courts warned them not to do so.

Legal advocates for same-sex marriage say that anywhere from 30 to 35 states may soon allow the unions. But behind those predictions are some tricky hurdles. Take Kansas. The state is in the Tenth Circuit, where federal lawsuits were filed to overturn state same-sex marriage bans in Utah and Oklahoma—and the U.S. Supreme Court agreed that those states’ bans must go. But the suit challenging Kansas’ ban was filed in state court, which hasn’t yet ruled. It may only be a matter of time before it too falls, and Judge Moriarty’s order may end up hastening the Kansas Supreme Court’s review.

These fine-print legal gyrations are not unique to Kansas, but are a result of complicated, state-by-state litigation that is in various stages in the legal pipeline.

Camilla Taylor, Lambda Legal Counsel and Marriage Project National Director, sent this explanation by e-mail on Wednesday to describe what has been unfolding this week:

When the Supreme Court denied review in cases from five states, the marriage bans in those states became invalid more or less immediately. All of the three affected circuit courts of appeals issued what's called a ‘mandate,’ which made their decisions final, within a day. In fact, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals did that within hours. Couples in the five states whose marriage bans had been struck down got married that day. The marriage bans in the other states that are geographically within the jurisdiction of the three affected circuit courts of appeal (e.g., West Virginia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Colorado, Kansas, Wyoming) are unconstitutional, too, because the reasoning of the decisions that were left standing by the Supreme Court's denial of cert is not specific to any state.

However, local officials and courts are still grappling with the mechanism for holding those bans invalid. In Colorado, the Attorney General is moving promptly to lift stays on court proceedings, and obtain court orders requiring clerks to comply with the 10th Circuit ruling. In Kansas, a state court has issued an administrative order requiring the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples. In West Virginia, a district court has lifted a stay that prevented a marriage lawsuit from proceeding, and is likely to rule within weeks. In North Carolina, a court has done likewise. This is largely a clean-up job.

It is clear that the tides of time are on the side of legalizing same-sex marriage across America. But it is also true that there is more to ensuring marriage equality than just calling it “a clean-up job.”

Just last week, while reporting in Kansas on soon-to-be published analyses of LGBT discrimination and the state’s equality movement, David Brown, the lawyer leading the challenge to the state’s same-sex marriage laws, explained that the Kansas Supreme Court has a legal “tradition” of viewing federal Tenth Circuit rulings as advisory. His lawsuit gives the Kansas Supreme Court several possible options, including overturning the state’s 2005 constitutional ban on the marriages.

But until all the unresolved legal issues that are reverberating across conservative states are settled, the expansion of same-sex marriage rights will continue to unfold in unruly and unpredictable ways.

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/us-supreme-court-unleashed-legal-tidal-wave-sweeping-away-same-sex-marriage-bans?paging=off&current_page=1#bookmark

More good news ~ ~ Sooz

Supreme Court lifts hold on same-sex marriage in Idaho
Reuters | 10 Oct 2014

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday allowed gay marriage in Idaho to go into effect by lifting a temporary hold imposed earlier in the week.

The court rejected an emergency request by the state, which is contesting a federal appeals court ruling from Tuesday that struck down the state’s gay marriage ban.

At around the same time the high court issued the order, a district court judge in North Carolina struck down that state’s gay marriage ban.

In the Idaho case, Justice Anthony Kennedy had on Wednesday temporarily prevented the appeals court ruling from going into effect and asked gay marriage supporters to file court papers in response to the state’s request.

The court action on Friday bookended a week in which the nine Supreme Court justices played a crucial role in paving the way for gay marriage in up to 11 states where it was previously illegal.

On Monday, the justices declined to hear appeals in seven different cases. By doing so, they left intact regional appeals court rulings that struck down gay marriage bans in five states. Another six states under the jurisdiction of the appeals courts were also affected.

Separately, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco struck down the Idaho and Nevada bans on Tuesday. That ruling in turn will affect three more states within the court’s jurisdiction that have gay marriage bans: Arizona, Alaska and Montana.

Overall, the action by the two courts means that up to 35 states are likely to soon have gay marriage. Before this week there were 19.

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh, Chris Reese and Marguerita Choy)

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/10/supreme-court-lifts-hold-on-same-sex-marriage-in-idaho/

And another! ~ ~ Sooz

Judge Strikes Down North Carolina's Gay Marriage Ban
By MICHAEL BIESECKER Published October 10, 2014, 5:51 PM EDT

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — A federal judge in North Carolina has struck down the state's gay marriage ban, opening the way for the first same-sex weddings in the state to begin immediately.

U.S. District Court Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr., in Asheville issued a ruling Friday shortly after 5 p.m. declaring the ban approved by state voters in 2012 unconstitutional.

Buncombe County Register of Deeds Drew Reisinger kept his Asheville office open late to begin issuing marriage licenses to waiting couples.

Cogburn's ruling follows Monday's announcement by the U.S. Supreme Court that it would not hear any appeal of a July ruling by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond striking down Virginia's ban. That court has jurisdiction over North Carolina.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/north-carolina-gay-marriage-ban-struck-down

this one is maybe the most interesting, in that NC voted to AMEND THEIR CONSTITUTION in 2012 to define marriage as being only between a man and woman.

As did Wisconsin some years ago.

And another! ~ ~ FTR, "... the constitutionality question" is not "in flux" except for some GOP/TPers who often manipulate the Constitution to fit their own mindsets ~ Sooz

Gay marriage ban struck down in Alaska
Reuters | 12 Oct 2014

JUNEAU Alaska (Reuters) – A U.S. federal judge on Sunday ruled that the state of Alaska’s ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.

Judge Timothy Burgess of the U.S. District Court for Alaska made the ruling after hearing oral arguments on Friday challenging the state’s 16-year-old ban, saying it added to discrimination already faced by gay and lesbian people every day.

“Alaska’s denial of the benefits and dignity of marriage for them only perpetuates this discrimination without legitimate grounds,” Burgess wrote.

He also barred Alaska from refusing to acknowledge lawful same-sex marriages conducted in other states.

Alaska Governor Sean Parnell said Sunday that the state would appeal the ruling, saying the constitutionality question was in flux.

“As Alaska’s governor, I have a duty to defend and uphold the law and the Alaska Constitution,” Parnell, a Republican, said.

Five couples, four of whom already had legally married in other states and a fifth wishing to marry in Alaska, filed their suit against the state in May challenging the ban.

In 1998, Alaska voters enacted a constitutional amendment that excludes same-sex couples from marriage.

The state contended that the voters should have the final word, not the courts.

Burgess disagreed, writing that the state’s right to define marriage “is not unbounded.”

“A state may not exercise its power to define marriage in a way that infringes upon individuals’ constitutional rights,” he wrote.

Sunday’s ruling caps off a busy seven days in federal court rulings on same-sex marriage.

On Tuesday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down same-sex marriage bans in Nevada and Idaho.

A day earlier the U.S. Supreme Court let another appeals court ruling stand to allow similar marriages.

On Sunday, Burgess’ 25-page ruling cited the need to bring an end to longstanding discrimination.

Joshua Decker, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Alaska, hailed the decision.

“Alaska had the misfortune of being the first state, in 1998, to ban equal marriage and bake discrimination into our constitution,” he said. “This victory brings equal rights to thousands of Alaskan couples who are in loving, committed relationships.”

(Reporting by Steve Quinn; Editing by Frank McGurty, Sharon Bernstein and Eric Walsh)

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/10/gay-marriage-ban-struck-down-in-alaska/

Here's more from my "go-to" guy, Steve Benen ~ what I'm especially loving is the speed at which these states are toppling ~ there are more "live links" to more/corroborating information in the original ~ Sooz

Alaska’s ban on marriage equality struck down
10/13/14 09:00 AM
By Steve Benen

Just seven days ago at this time, marriage equality was legal in 19 states and the District of Columbia. It’s occasionally surprising what can happen in a week.

Take last night, for example, where Alaska’s ban on same-sex marriage was struck down by a federal court. Emma Margolin reported:


The Alaska ruling, which is available online here (pdf), was issued by U.S. District Judge Timothy Burgess, who was appointed to the federal bench by George W. Bush.

What’s more, let’s also not forget that late Friday, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy lifted the temporary stay he’d imposed in this week on marriages in Idaho. This, in turn, allowed an appeals court ruling to go into effect, striking down Idaho’s ban against same-sex marriages.

And right around the same time, District Court Judge Max Cogburn Jr. struck down North Carolina’s gay-marriage ban, clearing the same for immediate same-sex unions in the state.

As the dust settles on this extraordinary seven-day stretch, what does the marriage landscape look like now?

When the Supreme Court took a pass on pending appeals, it immediately legalized same-sex marriage in five states: Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin. At the same time, the justices’ inaction also cleared the way for marriage equality in six additional states: Colorado, Kansas, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

Between these states, additional court rulings, and the effects of appeals court rulings, we can now say that marriage equality has either reached or is about to reach 35 states and the District of Columbia – nearly double the number of states from this time last week.

Following up on a recent discussion, what’s especially heartening for proponents of civil rights and equality is how routine success has become. It wasn’t long ago that these cases were nerve wracking – a gut-wrenching test of whether basic human decency would prevail – with countless families afraid to hope for fear of bitter disappointment.

Now, every case seems to end with the same celebratory result: watching the arc of history bend closer to justice.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/alaskas-ban-marriage-equality-struck-down#break

So which of the Palin kids is going to be the first to hitch-up with a same sex partner?

They probably have already tasted the "forbidden fruit" but won't admit it.

In my own view, this is nowhere even near a definitive list ~ ~ there are "live links" to more/corroborating information in the original ~ Sooz

AlterNet / By Zaid Jilani
The Top 10 Craziest Right-Wing Reactions to Expanding Marriage Equality
The nutcase bigots are losing—and that makes them even nuttier.

October 8, 2014 | Marriage equality is slowly becoming the law of the land, as a series of judicial decisions “effectively made gay marriage legal in 30 states,” a process that has only temporarily been delayed by the Supreme Court blocking gay marriages in Idaho and Nevada for a time.

But sure enough, as America finally inches towards joining numerous other countries where same-sex marriage is legal, the right-wing is freaking out, predicting all manner of doom. Here's ten of the craziest reactions:

1. Gay Marriage Is Like The Pro-Slavery Dred Scott Decision: At The National Review, Matthew J. Franck, said that the expansion of marriage equality is like “a slow-motion Dred Scott for the twenty-first century.”

2. Gay Marriage Will Spread Disease: Liberty Counsel chairman Mat Staver warned that marriage equality would be “harmful to individuals” and lead to all “kinds of serious and deadly disease.”

3. Gay Marriage Will Of Course Lead To Polygamy: Right-wing radio host and activist Erick Erickson predicted that “all the people now saying polygamy is different from gay marriage will be polygamy’s chief advocates within the decade.”

4. We Need To Amend The Constitution To Stop Gay Marriage: Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) went as far as to say he will introduce an amendment to the Constitution to stop the national recognition of marriage equality.

5. The Courts Are Inflicting A “Crime Against Nature”: The American Family Association's Brian Fischer had a characteristically crazy response, saying that the court decisions have inflicted “on every state in the Union marriage that is based on the infamous crime against nature.”

6. Gay Marriage Will Put You Out Of Work: The Family Research Council warned, “As more and more people lose their livelihoods because they refuse to not just tolerate but celebrate same-sex marriage, Americans will see the true goal, which is for activists to use the Court to impose a redefinition of natural marriage on the entire nation.”

7. Gay Marriage Is Why You Should Leave The Overly-Tolerant Republican Party: Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee threatened to leave the Republican Party if it did not act to stop the expansion of gay marriage.

8. The Supreme Court Refusing To Hear Appeals To Marriage Equality Committed A “Hit And Run”: Virginia Republican delegate Bob Marshall called the pro-marriage court decision a legislative “hit and run.”

9. Gay Marriage Is Reason For Impeachment: The American Renewal Project called for impeaching judges that paved the way for marriage equality.

10. Marriage Equality Is A Threat To National Security: GOP chairman Reince Priebus was asked about the issue and said that while it's not a “top here issue for the midterms, I think long term it's an issue in regard to what we need to do in the country to have a strong economy, a strong defense and a strong society.”

Although much of the right-wing freakout has been aimed at the courts, the courts are simply reflecting wider American public opinion. In May, 55 percent of Americans thought marriage equality should be law of the land, with 42 percent opposing.

http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/top-10-craziest-right-wing-reactions-expanding-marriage-equality

+ Alaska + Arizona + Wyoming is simply ... AMAZINGLY GOOD NEWS! ~ ~ Sooz

Wyoming marriage equality ban joins Arizona and Alaska in being struck down
Reuters | 17 Oct 2014 at 19:36 ET

Barriers to gay marriage fell in Arizona, Alaska and Wyoming on Friday following a series of federal court actions in the latest in a series of legal victories for supporters of same-sex matrimony in America.

In Arizona, U.S. District Judge John Sedwick wrote in a ruling made public on Friday that the state’s restrictions on gay marriage were “unconstitutional by virtue of the fact that they deny same-sex couples the equal protection of the law.”

Same-sex couples in the state began getting married right away. In Phoenix, Kevin Patterson and David Larance rushed to a county clerk’s office after the decision and were swiftly married in a ceremony just outside the building.

“I’m just overjoyed, it’s been a long time coming,” said Patterson, a plaintiff in the Arizona case.

Separately, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a last-minute request from Alaska seeking to block a ruling by a federal judge that struck down that state’s ban, and a U.S. district judge overturned a gay marriage ban in Wyoming.

A state holiday in Alaska meant gay couples would not be able to apply for marriage licenses there until next week, nor were marriages expected to immediately proceed in Wyoming thanks to a temporary stay on the judge’s ruling in order to provide the state time to pursue an appeal.

The court actions would bring to 32 the number of states that allow gay marriage, if the Wyoming ban is not placed on a more permanent hold by a higher court by Oct. 23.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court surprised observers by leaving intact lower court rulings that struck down gay marriage in five states. A day later, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction over Arizona, found gay marriage bans in Idaho and Nevada were unconstitutional.

Arizona’s attorney general said he would not appeal Sedwick’s ruling because there was no chance of success, and gave the go-ahead for marriages to proceed.

But Arizona’s Republican governor, Jan Brewer, lashed out at the federal court system over recent gay marriage rulings.

“It is not only disappointing, but also deeply troubling, that unelected federal judges can dictate the laws of individual states, create rights based on their personal policy preferences and supplant the will of the people in an area traditionally left to the states for more than 200 years,” Brewer said in a statement.

The judge who overturned Arizona’s ban, after ordering the state in September to recognize the marriage of a gay man wed in California whose same-sex spouse later died, declined to put his ruling on hold.

In Wyoming, Republican Governor Matt Mead had said prior to Friday’s ruling that the state should not appeal, according to local media. A spokeswoman for the governor did not return calls seeking comment. The Wyoming attorney general’s office said he was traveling and not immediately available for comment.

(Reporting by David Schwartz; Additional reporting by Lawrence Hurley in Washington and Steve Quinn in Juneau, Alaska; Writing by Alex Dobuzinskis; Editing by Cynthia Johnston and Will Dunham)

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/10/wyoming-marriage-equality-ban-joins-arizona-and-alaska-in-being-struck-down/