The 8 Biggest Lessons From Yesterday's Prop 8 Ruling

[xchrom]

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/02/the-8-biggest-lessons-from-yesterdays-prop-8-ruling/252738/



Now that I've had a few more hours to look a little more closely at yesterday's big same-sex marriage ruling -- the one that threads the eye of a needle we've all been peering through for the past few years -- it's time to highlight a little more of the nuance that accompanied the 133 pages of the 9th Circuit ruling. It's also time to step back and take the wider view. So, in honor of the ever-foundering Proposition 8, here are eight thoughts for the morning after.

1. The High Court Will Have to Weigh In Eventually. Yes, it's true that the Supreme Court is less likely to take the appeal now because the 9th Circuit limited the potential impact of its ruling. The justices can more plausibly say that they let California try to sort things out for itself. But the legal conflict over same-sex marriage is a national issue, and eventually the justices will have to decide: aside from equal protection and due process questions, does the Full, Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution require all states to recognize same-sex marriage so long as one does?

2. The Parade of Horribles Will Continue. Let's say the Supreme Court declines the case. Then what? The legal problems, in California and elsewhere, will only get worse. Same-sex marriages would resume in California. There would be another ballot initiative there that would seek only to prospectively ban same-sex marriages. More states would recognize those marriages while others explicitly blocked them. For all the political action that has occurred on this front, the worst of the legal chaos is still to come.

3. The 'Rational Basis' for Prop 8 Isn't Very Rational. Judge N. Randy Smith's dissent is notable. "Our personal views regarding the political and sociological debate on marriage equality are irrelevant to our task," Judge Smith wrote, before whittling down to an absurd nub the legal standard to be applied to Prop 8. Thus, as his language grew more specious and abstract, the "rational basis" test became the "rational relation to some legitimate end" test, which became the "reasonably conceivable state of facts that could provide a rational basis" test, which became the "have arguable assumptions underlying its plausible rationales" test.

[William769]

1. Great!

In case anyone missed this from yesterday I had posted it in another forum.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101710978

[xchrom]

2. I swear to god - I need new eyeballs. Nt

[William769]

3. Not this time they are unrelated.

[xchrom]

4. ...

[HillWilliam]

5. Well that does explain one thing

The majority opinion was a fairly easy and logical read. I was having a lot of trouble wading through the dissent, unable to follow it all the way through. It seemed like an awful lot of procedural nit-picking. Now that I understand this guy is a Mormon, Bush-holdover who's grasping at ever-weakening straws, Smith's rambling dissent comes into perspective.

Phucque him.