View Poll Results: SCOTUS: Will petitioners will prevail on Question 1 in Obergefell v. Hodges?

Voters
8. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes: ME/SSM will be mandated nationwide.

    6 75.00%
  • No: SCOTUS will not mandate SSM/ME nationwide.

    1 12.50%
  • No clue.

    1 12.50%
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: SCOTUS: Will petitioners will prevail on Question 1 in Obergefell v. Hodges?

  1. #1
    Student
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    07-27-15 @ 01:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    218

    SCOTUS: Will petitioners will prevail on Question 1 in Obergefell v. Hodges?

    It is crunch time for SCOTUS! What will they do? This is one of those moments you may remember where you were for the rest of your life when you heard the news. Here is a poll to make your prediction.

    This question is not about whether you think marriage equality/SSM is constitutionally mandated. This poll goes to what you think SCOTUS will do with question 1. To be even clearer, questions on the morality or merits of SSM/Marriage equality are outside of this thread, except to the extent they bear on the one question: What will SCOTUS do?

    To be even clearer, if you think SCOTUS should not mandate SSM/ME but think they will, your vote should be yes.

    Here is a link to the transcript of the oral arguments.

    Argh. In editing, I left a typo in the poll. Oh well, you get the idea.
    Last edited by AlyssaD; 06-10-15 at 05:16 PM.

  2. #2
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:49 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    89,365
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: SCOTUS: Will petitioners will prevail on Question 1 in Obergefell v. Hodges?

    Quote Originally Posted by AlyssaD View Post
    It is crunch time for SCOTUS! What will they do? This is one of those moments you may remember where you were for the rest of your life when you heard the news. Here is a poll to make your prediction.

    This question is not about whether you think marriage equality/SSM is constitutionally mandated. This poll goes to what you think SCOTUS will do with question 1. To be even clearer, questions on the morality or merits of SSM/Marriage equality are outside of this thread, except to the extent they bear on the one question: What will SCOTUS do?

    To be even clearer, if you think SCOTUS should not mandate SSM/ME but think they will, your vote should be yes.

    Here is a link to the transcript of the oral arguments.

    Argh. In editing, I left a typo in the poll. Oh well, you get the idea.
    First off, both questions are equally important, though the second may be moot if SCOTUS rules SSM bans are unconstitutional. An outcome of SSM bans are constitutional, but states have to recognize SSMs performed in other states is a distinct if not highly likely outcome.

    Second, there is alot of room even if they do rule against SSM bans as to what they could do. The most likely outcome to my mind would be a very narrow ruling, stating that SSM bans do not pass rational basis review and as such are unconstitutional. That steers them clear of questions about what level of review is appropriate for discrimination based on orientation, does not label SSM itself a right, and limits the level of precedent the case sets. However, even being the most likely, I think it is less than 50 % chance of that outcome, with the court ruling SSM bans do not pass intermediate scrutiny based on gender discrimination, or finding that SSM bans are constitutional but not recognizing SSM performed in other states nearly as likely.

    There really are a whole lot of possible permutations to exactly how the court rules, and the details will probably be at least nearly as important as the actual decision.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  3. #3
    Student
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    07-27-15 @ 01:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    218

    Re: SCOTUS: Will petitioners will prevail on Question 1 in Obergefell v. Hodges?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    First off, both questions are equally important, though the second may be moot if SCOTUS rules SSM bans are unconstitutional. An outcome of SSM bans are constitutional, but states have to recognize SSMs performed in other states is a distinct if not highly likely outcome.

    Second, there is alot of room even if they do rule against SSM bans as to what they could do. The most likely outcome to my mind would be a very narrow ruling, stating that SSM bans do not pass rational basis review and as such are unconstitutional. That steers them clear of questions about what level of review is appropriate for discrimination based on orientation, does not label SSM itself a right, and limits the level of precedent the case sets. However, even being the most likely, I think it is less than 50 % chance of that outcome, with the court ruling SSM bans do not pass intermediate scrutiny based on gender discrimination, or finding that SSM bans are constitutional but not recognizing SSM performed in other states nearly as likely.

    There really are a whole lot of possible permutations to exactly how the court rules, and the details will probably be at least nearly as important as the actual decision.
    I thought about making two polls, one for each question but decided if someone cared they could make one on question 2. I certainly did not want to include all of the permutations.

    SCOTUS could say they need not reach the question of the level of scrutiny but find there is still no rational basis. Even this "narrow" holding would settle the question although I suppose states could then start amending their statutes to state the "rational basis" with each state then having to be litigated all over again.

    I doubt SCOTUS wants to revisit this issue repetitively. I will be bold and give numbers (which of course are just wild guesses): I'm going to say it is 65/35, maybe a little higher, the Petitioner's win. If there is a win for the Petitioner's I think it is slightly more probable that it will be under intermediate scrutiny with Roberts chiming in on gender discrimination.

    We will see soon!

  4. #4
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,677

    Re: SCOTUS: Will petitioners will prevail on Question 1 in Obergefell v. Hodges?

    Personally, I don't see that there's a constitutional right for state sanctioned marriage of any kind, same sex, heterosexual or otherwise. As a result, equal protection should provide that if states are entering into the business of marriage, they must be prepared to sanction or recognize any form of marriage, at least between any two people, if not more broadly. To do otherwise, would institutionalize discrimination based on sexual preference and contradict those constitutional protections.

    That said, greater division between what is considered the religious rite of marriage and state sanctioned marriage will be further divided, which is not necessarily a bad thing, in my view.

    Of course, your courts have been known to invent rights out of whole cloth, so who knows for sure.
    A Canadian conservative is one who believes in limited government and that the government should stay out of our wallets and out of our bedrooms.

  5. #5
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:49 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    89,365
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: SCOTUS: Will petitioners will prevail on Question 1 in Obergefell v. Hodges?

    Quote Originally Posted by AlyssaD View Post
    It is crunch time for SCOTUS! What will they do? This is one of those moments you may remember where you were for the rest of your life when you heard the news. Here is a poll to make your prediction.

    This question is not about whether you think marriage equality/SSM is constitutionally mandated. This poll goes to what you think SCOTUS will do with question 1. To be even clearer, questions on the morality or merits of SSM/Marriage equality are outside of this thread, except to the extent they bear on the one question: What will SCOTUS do?

    To be even clearer, if you think SCOTUS should not mandate SSM/ME but think they will, your vote should be yes.

    Here is a link to the transcript of the oral arguments.

    Argh. In editing, I left a typo in the poll. Oh well, you get the idea.
    Here is an interesting article you might enjoy: Joe Loves Tom and Sue: Why Roberts Could Be Writing the Same-Sex Marriage Decision | Maryland Appellate Blog

    Second, as also noted at the MSBA panel, Roberts is a judicial minimalist. With a few notable exceptions, Roberts prefers to resolve cases on what it sees as the narrowest grounds possible, drawing the most votes as possible. (Elonis v. United States is but the latest example.) Roberts’ questioning indicates that he sees sex discrimination as the narrowest argument for the petitioners. He asked the states’ counsel “if Sue loves Joe and Tom loves Joe, Sue can marry him and Tom can’t. And the difference is based upon their different sex. Why isn’t that a straightforward question of sexual discrimination?”
    Third, on a related point, Roberts may have a particular reason to desire a narrow ruling in Obergefell. Conservatives have long feared that striking down state same-sex-marriage bans would endanger bans on polygamy. Justice Scalia has said as much in his dissents in Windsor and Lawrence v. Texas. In Obergefell,a 15-state amicus brief, citing the pending appeal of a ruling striking down Utah’s criminalization of polygamy, argued that a ruling for the petitioners would “inevitably override legitimate policy differences in other areas, such as how [marriage] is to be limited based on age, consanguinity, and number of participants.”
    During argument in Obergefell, Justice Alito asked whether a group consisting of two men and two women – all highly educated consenting adults – would be entitled to a marriage license under the petitioners’ arguments. Justices Scalia and Alito both were skeptical of the petitioners’ answer. Roberts said nothing, but it’s doubtful that he is as confident as the petitioners’ counsel that the four-person hypothetical was easily distinguished.
    Roberts’ love-triangle hypothetical invites a follow-up question: “What if Joe loves Tom and Sue?” It’s easy to imagine Roberts fearing that Justice Kennedy’s likely rationale – a dignity-based argument – provides an insufficiently clear answer. But a sex-discrimination rationale provides an easy answer: there is no sex-discrimination if the state tells Tom, Joe, and Sue that only a two-person marriage is legal.
    The first point strikes me as questionable, but these two points quoted are quite possible.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •