Support the Café
Search our site

Breaking: DOMA unconstitutional, Prop 8 case dismissed

Breaking: DOMA unconstitutional, Prop 8 case dismissed

Supreme Court rules DOMA unconstitutional on 5-4 vote, and dismisses Prop 8 case for lack of standing. More to come.


The DOMA opinion is here.

The Prop 8 opinion is here.

On DOMA:

Justice Kennedy: The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity. By seeking to displace this protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others.

Justice Scalia: The Court’s opinion both in explaining its jurisdiction and its decision “both spring from the same diseased root: an exalted notion of the role of this court in American democratic society.”

The Washington Post.

The New York Times.

On Prop 8

A blog on what might happen if, as happened, it was dismissed for lack of standing.

The Washington Post

From Scotus blog: There will be much further discussion and analysis about how the decision in Perry affects other couples in California. For the time being, we will say this: the Supreme Court has dismissed the appeal challenging a final order from the trial court. It would appear, then, that the order will go into effect. And it appears that this final order purports to prohibit the Attorney General and the Governor from enforcing Prop. 8.

There could well be new challenges to the scope of that order. But for the time being, the order appears to be in effect and to prevent enforcement of Proposition 8 statewide.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

4 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jonathan Galliher

Your link to the SCOTUS blog just under the “On Prop 8” heading seems to point to an analysis of what would happen in the DOMA case, not Prop 8, if the court didn’t rule due to a lack of standing.

IT

My wife and i married prior to the passage of Prop8. While our marriage remain(ed) legal in CA, we and other legally married same sex couples lived in a legal limbo regarding federal rights, responsibilities, and rules. This step correctly asserts that if the state considers us married, so should the federal government. The struggle for full equality continues, but on this 10th anniversary of Lawrence v. Texas, we made another step to full citizenship.

susan forsburg

Eric Bonetti

What wonderful news! Even better, there is a service tonight at the Washington National Cathedral: http://www.nationalcathedral.org/events/LGBT20130626.shtml#.UcsG_cu9KSM

Could not be prouder of the Cathedral’s role in being a voice for equality.

Peter Pearson

“God lifts up the lowly and fills the hungry with good things.”

Facebooktwitterrss
Support the Café
Past Posts
2020_012
2020_013_B
2020_013_A

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café