A federal appeals court on Thursday
became the first in over a year to uphold state bans on gay marriage
at the appellate level.
In a split 2-1 decision, a 3-judge
panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati upheld bans
in four states: Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee. The cases
were heard together in August.
After acknowledging that marriage
equality in all 50 states is inevitable and that gay couples “have
experienced prejudice in this country,” the majority concluded that
the issue would be better settled “through the customary political
process.”
“This case ultimately presents two
ways to think about change,” the
opinion states. “One is whether the Supreme Court will
constitutionalize a new definition of marriage to meet new policy
views about the issue. The other is whether the Court will begin to
undertake a different form of change – change in the way we as a
country optimize the handling of efforts to address requests for new
civil liberties.”
“If the Court takes the second
approach, is it not possible that the traditional arbiters of change
– the people – will meet today's challenge admirably and settle
the issue in a productive way?”
“When the courts do not let the
people resolve new social issues like this one, they perpetuate the
idea that the heroes in these change events are judges and lawyers.
Better in this instance, we think, to allow change through the
customary political processes, in which the people, gay and straight
alike, become the heroes of their own stories by meeting each other
not as adversaries in a court system but as fellow citizens seeking
to resolve a new social issue in a fair-minded way,” the brief
concludes.
Two out of the three judges who heard
the cases are George W. Bush nominees – Jeffrey S. Sutton and
Deborah L. Cook – while Martha Craig Daughtrey was nominated by
Bill Clinton. Daughtrey disagreed with the majority opinion in her
dissent, saying it would make an “engrossing TED Talk.”
“But as an appellate court decision,
it wholly fails to grapple with the relevant constitutional question
in this appeal: whether a state's constitutional prohibition of
same-sex marriage violates equal protection under the Fourteenth
Amendment. Instead, the majority sets up a false premise – that
the question before us is 'who should decide?' – and leads us
through a largely irrelevant discourse on democracy and federalism,”
she wrote.
Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to
Marry, criticized the ruling as “out of step” and called on the
Supreme Court to step in.
“Today’s ruling is completely out
of step with the Supreme Court's clear signal last month, out of step
with the constitutional command as recognized by nearly every state
and federal court in the past year, and out of step with the majority
of the American people,” Wolfson said in a statement. “This
anomalous ruling won't stand the test of time or appeal. But with
discrimination still burdening too many families, and now with this
split in the circuits, Freedom to Marry calls on the Supreme Court to
swiftly take these cases, affirm the freedom to marry, and bring
national resolution once and for all. American couples and their
families should no longer be forced to fight court by court, state by
state, day by day for the freedom and dignity that our Constitution
promises.”
This conservative court sides with state sponsored hate and discrimination all in the name of not creating adversarial animus between gay and straight people?
That we need to work it out together thru the voting process on the state level?
Who the fuck do these dumbasses think they are fooling?
No comments:
Post a Comment