Which is why I don't understand why they didn't defer the accept/reject appeals from the 5-states until they find out what the rulings of the 5th and 6th are. Delaying the ruling for 30-60 days would maintain the current status quo pending those decisions. Then decide.
Denying cert now, means SSCM will be able to start in more states taking it up to 30 (+DC). If the 5th or 6th (or both) generate a new case with a split then it will be even harder for the SCOTUS to issue a ruling against Marriage Equality.
Nothing has been left up to the states, and this is not a "compromise" as you suggest later in the thread. While I think most SSM advocates would have liked to see a ruling from SCOTUS(I know I would like to get it done and over with), this still is nothing short of a significant gain for SSM, with a large number of states now, by the court not taking action, going to be compelled to allow SSM, with about 60 % of the country living where SSM is legal.
Run your own nation, play Cybernations."Conservatism is the blind and fear-filled worship of dead radicals."
- Mark Twain
I would have preferred that the Supreme Court take up the case. In an odd way, this is a blessing for the anti-marriage equality crowd because now, Marriage equality will only be the law (for now) in 30 of the 50 states, delaying the inevitable. It does, allow the right-wing the opportunity to try to stack the Supreme Court with some more activist judges to implement their right-wing social agenda including defeating marriage equality....which is exactly why the next Presidential election is extremely important in order to protect the Constitution.
Women (Nasty or otherwise) are going to be the reason that Donald Trump is NEVER President!
I would have preferred the Supreme Court take up the court cases as well. We'd have marriage in 50 states much quicker.
Help fight Zika, TB, HIV/AIDs and water pollution by donating your CPU's excess processing time to computing-based scientific research.