I suppose that Scalians like Richmond law prof Kevin Walsh will have their day in November when, as appears likely, the reactionaries take the Senate. But for now I draw some satisfaction from his discomfiture. I think he's right here though - denying cert in the several ripe cases that squarely present the constitutional issue is a back-handed way to recognize the still unsettled right. Unlike "
phony originalists" such as his mentor I think that constitutional law properly develops unevenly as a dynamic interaction of popular sentiment, state practice, executive and legislative action, and judicial interpretation, so I wouldn't call the decision "irresponsible". But the Supreme Court punted here - unwilling to directly confront the controversial question - while leaving the pro-same-sex marriage circuit decisions in place. National uniformity will have to wait for another day. Like cases will not be treated alike until then. - gwc
Wow - Same sex marriage petitions denied - Mirror of Justice
SCOTUSBlog is reporting that the Supreme Court has "denied review of all seven of the petitions arising from challenges to state bans on same-sex marriage." This is a surprise. It is also irresponsible. To allow the redefinition of marriage for such a large segment of the American population on the basis of emanations from Windsor is not right. It's true there is no circuit split yet, but there seems little question that the Fourth, Seventh, and Tenth Circuits have "decided an important question of federal law that has not been, but should be, settled by [the Supreme] Court."
'via Blog this'
No comments:
Post a Comment