• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Chief Justice John Roberts’ lesbian cousin to attend Proposition 8 arguments

Redress

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
112,952
Reaction score
60,480
Location
Sarasota Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Chief Justice John Roberts

Chief Justice John Roberts' first cousin, a lesbian, will attend Tuesday's oral arguments in the first gay marriage case to reach the Supreme Court. She will be in the seating section reserved for the justice's family and close friends.
Jean Podrasky, 48, told the Los Angeles Times that she hopes her first cousin will decide to overturn California's gay marriage ban, called Proposition 8, so that she can marry her longtime girlfriend. “He is a smart man,” Podrasky told the paper of the George W. Bush-appointed justice. “He is a good man. I believe he sees where the tide is going. I do trust him. I absolutely trust that he will go in a good direction.”

...

While in private practice as an attorney, Roberts, a devout Catholic, gave pro-bono legal advice to gay activists who were challenging a Colorado state law that nullified all anti-discrimination statutes protecting gays and lesbians. Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court's conservative-leaning swing vote, ultimately wrote the opinion striking down that law in 1996, ruling that it appeared to be driven by hatred against a group of people and served no legitimate state purpose. That case, Romer v. Evans, became part of the basis for Kennedy's later opinion in 2003 striking down state sodomy laws as discriminatory against gay people.
Click to expand...

I did not know about Roberts giving the bro-bone legal advice to a gay group. Kinda interesting actually, Roberts, not the chief Justice, gave advice to one side of a ruling that Kennedy eventually wrote the ruling on.
 
Interesting. Here's to hoping Roberts makes the right choice when it comes.
 
I certainly hope he doesn't put family issues and bias over legal matters.
 
Redress said:
Chief Justice John Roberts



I did not know about Roberts giving the bro-bone legal advice to a gay group. Kinda interesting actually, Roberts, not the chief Justice, gave advice to one side of a ruling that Kennedy eventually wrote the ruling on.
Click to expand...


"Bro-bone" advice? I was thinking more along the lines of "pro-boner," but that works too.
 
Muddy Creek said:
Same sex marriage IS a family issue.
Click to expand...

His family issues. He should not rule on bias because of his lesbian cousin or have that factor at all in his decision making.
 
digsbe said:
His family issues. He should not rule on bias because of his lesbian cousin or have that factor at all in his decision making.
Click to expand...

ALL family issues. The right to marry is a family issue
 
I bet all of the judges have relatives that are gay. I think the signifigance of this is just that she is going and setting in the reservced and family section. And it is open to the public.
 
Muddy Creek said:
Same sex marriage IS a family issue.
Click to expand...

Great job missing the point. If someone is moved to ignore the constitutional basis of an argument because a family member appears in front them that is fundamental failure of that persons character.
 
digsbe said:
His family issues. He should not rule on bias because of his lesbian cousin or have that factor at all in his decision making.
Click to expand...

Actually he should recuse himself
 
Rocketman said:
Actually he should recuse himself
Click to expand...

Not if Scalia isn't

Michael Russnow: Scalia's Gay Stance Is Unacceptable: Recusal From Supreme Court Deliberations on DOMA and California Proposition 8 Is Called For

In his dissent in a 1996 Supreme Court decision overturning a voter-approved, anti-gay referendum in Colorado, Scalia wrote in support of the voter majority, "I had thought that one could consider certain conduct reprehensible -- murder, for example, or polygamy or cruelty to animals -- and could exhibit even 'animus' toward such conduct."

And in 2003, after the Supreme Court negated a law in Texas that had criminalized same-sex "sodomy," Scalia wrote in dissent, "The Texas statute undeniably seeks to further the belief of its citizens that certain forms of sexual behavior are 'immoral and unacceptable' -- the same interest furthered by criminal laws against fornication, bigamy, adultery, adult incest, bestiality and obscenity."

Justice Scalia's bias clearly hampers his judgment to deliver a balanced view of what should be acceptable or not under our Constitution.
Click to expand...
 
mak2 said:
I bet even you have gay realetives. They just dont trust you enough to tell you.
Click to expand...

I have a cousin that has been open about it for 48 years. Hate it for you.
 
Rocketman said:
Show where he based that off existent family members or cited such.
Click to expand...

Show me where Roberts based legal decisions, as Scalia did, against homosexuals with prejudice, and then who me where Roberts has mentioned he favors same sex marriage because of a relative.
 
Muddy Creek said:
Show me where Roberts based legal decisions, as Scalia did, against homosexuals with prejudice, and then who me where Roberts has mentioned he favors same sex marriage because of a relative.
Click to expand...

he hasn't yet, neither did Scalia unless you believe everything you read in the Huffington Post
 
Chief Justice John Roberts' first cousin, a lesbian, will attend Tuesday's oral arguments in the first gay marriage case to reach the Supreme Court. She will be in the seating section reserved for the justice's family and close friends.
Jean Podrasky, 48, told the Los Angeles Times that she hopes her first cousin will decide to overturn California's gay marriage ban, called Proposition 8, so that she can marry her longtime girlfriend. “He is a smart man,” Podrasky told the paper of the George W. Bush-appointed justice. “He is a good man. I believe he sees where the tide is going. I do trust him. I absolutely trust that he will go in a good direction.”
Click to expand...

Someone who doesn't understand at all her cousin's job. And what his cousin thinks holds no water here.
 
Rocketman said:
he hasn't yet, neither did Scalia unless you believe everything you read in the Huffington Post
Click to expand...

I believe the facts which is what The Huffington Post put out there showing Scalia's bias in this area. Your opinion of the source does not negate the facts presented by the source. If Scalia won't recluse himself, then Roberts CERTAINLY has no reason to do so.

recusing legal definition of recusing. recusing synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

Generally, a judge must recuse himself if he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party to the lawsuit or has personal knowledge of the facts that are disputed in the proceeding. The Code of Judicial Conduct, a judicial ethics code drafted by the American Bar Association in 1972 and adopted by most states and the federal government, outlines situations in which a judge should disqualify himself from presiding over a matter. Canon 3C of the Judicial Code outlines these situations, including the judge's personal bias or prejudice toward a matter or its participants, personal knowledge of the facts that are disputed in a case, a professional or familial relationship with a party or an attorney, or a financial interest in the outcome of the matter. Most interpretations of the code mandate a judge's disqualification or recusal if any of these factors are present.
Click to expand...

Scalia has exhibited extreme bias and prejudice in this.
 
Muddy Creek said:
And soon, any gender. ;)
Click to expand...

Hopefully not. Marriage is not the union between two men or women according to the legal definition in most states and the traditional definition that has been held for hundreds of years in the country.

You can label a turd as a golden brick, but that doesn't make it so. States issue the licenses and people have every right to vote on the legal definition of marriage. Taking that right away would be a horrible violation of rights and the democratic process.
 
Muddy Creek said:
I believe the facts which is what The Huffington Post put out there showing Scalia's bias in this area. Your opinion of the source does not negate the facts presented by the source. If Scalia won't recluse himself, then Roberts CERTAINLY has no reason to do so.

recusing legal definition of recusing. recusing synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.



Scalia has exhibited extreme bias and prejudice in this.
Click to expand...

logic does not equal bias, but continue with your programming
 
digsbe said:
Hopefully not. Marriage is not the union between two men or women according to the legal definition in most states and the traditional definition that has been held for hundreds of years in the country.

You can label a turd as a golden brick, but that doesn't make it so. States issue the licenses and people have every right to vote on the legal definition of marriage. Taking that right away would be a horrible violation of rights and the democratic process.
Click to expand...

States only have that right unless it infringes on the liberty of a section of the population. Women's right to vote, Blacks right to vote are all issues which had to be made federal, as it involved a whole group's right to participate in state institutions. Marriage is one such institution, which issues the license to marry, and therefore will be decided on a national, not state, level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom