td11 wrote:http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_g2bh.pdf

Scalia:

This case is about power in several respects. It is about the power of our people to govern themselves, and the power of this Court to pronounce the law. Today’s opinion aggrandizes the latter, with the predictable consequence of diminishing the former. We have no power to decide this case. And even if we did, we have no power under theConstitution to invalidate this democratically adopted leg- islation.

i wonder how much hand wringing scalia is doing??

This case is about power in several respects. It is about the power of our people to govern themselves, and the power of this Court to pronounce the law. Today’s opinion aggrandizes the latter, with the predictable consequence of diminishing the former. We have no power to decide this case. And even if we did, we have no power under theConstitution to invalidate this democratically adopted leg- islation.

DOMA singles out a class of persons deemed by a State entitled ot recognition and protection to enhance their own liberty."

TenuredVulture wrote:If you were ever stupid enough to believe in "judicial philosophy" you really can't do so anymore. Here's how it works if you're a Supreme Court Justice--you figure out how you want the ruling to go, and you hire very smart law school graduates to figure out a justification for it. Sometimes, it's pretty funny.

td11 wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:If you were ever stupid enough to believe in "judicial philosophy" you really can't do so anymore. Here's how it works if you're a Supreme Court Justice--you figure out how you want the ruling to go, and you hire very smart law school graduates to figure out a justification for it. Sometimes, it's pretty funny.

this is majorly depressing though

TenuredVulture wrote:If you were ever stupid enough to believe in "judicial philosophy" you really can't do so anymore. Here's how it works if you're a Supreme Court Justice--you figure out how you want the ruling to go, and you hire very smart law school graduates to figure out a justification for it. Sometimes, it's pretty funny.

I'm specifically thinking about federalism/states rights--if you're Scalia, state's rights are good if you're keeping blacks from voting, but bad if you're letting gays marry.

And that's all there really is to it. Parsing decisions for "legal thinking" and such like is pretty much a waste of time.

In response to a few comments, please scroll back up in the liveblog to 10:26, where Amy announced that this is "Perry," i.e., Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Prop 8 case. All of the commentary from that point down relates to this case, in which the appeal from the district court's order was dismissed for a lack of standing.

Amy Howe: Here's a Plain English take on Hollingsworth v. Perry, the challenge to the constitutionality of California's Proposition 8, which bans same-sex marriage: After the two same-sex couples filed their challenge to Proposition 8 in federal court in California, the California government officials who would normally have defended the law in court, declined to do so. So the proponents of Proposition 8 stepped in to defend the law, and the California Supreme Court (in response to a request by the lower court) ruled that they could do so under state law. But today the Supreme Court held that the proponents do not have the legal right to defend the law in court. As a result, it held, the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the intermediate appellate court, has no legal force, and it sent the case back to that court with instructions for it to dismiss the appeal.

td11 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:The Democratic resurgence in Texas (if my Facebook wall tonight is to be believed) will be on the back of an issue where the public disagrees with them 62-28%. It's hard to see how this can fail.

http://progresstexas.org/press/bipartis ... egislation

Texans disapprove of the legislature taking up abortion bills during the special session by 80%, according to a bipartisan poll conducted from June 17-19, 2013. In addition, 63% of Texas voters think the state has enough abortion restrictions, and 71% say the legislature should be focusing on the economy and jobs.