Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

SCOTUS strikes down DOMA | 293 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

SCOTUS strikes down DOMA

Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 26 2013 @ 11:33 AM EDT

Welcome to the modern world US ;-)

Although I see 4 reasons for activists not to rest on their laurels for too
long.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

My mother-in-law wins an argument...

Authored by: hardmath on Wednesday, June 26 2013 @ 11:39 AM EDT

After a fashion. (She's smiling about today's news.)

Some decades back she chided me for remarking that the federal government discriminated against homosexuals. My point was that such discrimination, premised on notions of "blackmail risks", became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

She refused to believe that such things were contemporaneous, pigeonholing it as an outmoded practice on the scrapheap of history.

Apparently today she's right.

---
Rosser's trick: "For every proof of me, there is a shorter proof of my negation".

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Sorry, that's an incorrect analysis

Authored by: celtic_hackr on Wednesday, June 26 2013 @ 01:07 PM EDT

Striking down the DOMA had no impact on Prop 8. They only struck down the part
of DOMA that resulted in unequal treatment of homosexual marriages. Sadly, it
was not a unanimous decision, as it was clearly in violation of the
Constitution.

They did however also rule on the Prop 8 case, which they punted, by denying the
private group standing. Which in it's effect leaves in place the last ruling,
and hence gay marriage is now legal in California again. I see a new wave of gay
marriages taking place in the coming weeks in ol' Sunny CA.

While I agree with the result in the Prop 8 case, I don't agree on the premise
for the ruling. The issue of private citizens having standing to sue for alleged
unjust laws and rulings. I think it should absolutely be true that citizen(s)
can sue over laws and rulings by local, state and federal authorities. But, it
is a long standing position of the courts to deny this.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

No Severability Clause? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 27 2013 @ 08:32 AM EDT

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )