U.S. Supreme Court Hears Same-Sex Marriage Cases


SCOTUS

The Supreme Court of the United States heard two cases regarding same-sex marriage.  The first involved the Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA) and the second, Proposition 8 in California, defining marriage as between one man and one woman.  I’ve written about the specifics in earlier posts and the arguments will be laid out before the Court.  But the Constitutional legality in these cases, really has nothing whatsoever to do with the Constitution.  That’s correct.  If the court believes it’s time for a change, they will find a way.  Brown vs The Board of Ed is one simple example.  Roe vs. Wade another.  As in so many cases which have preceded these, the Court, despite its supposed isolation from social issues, has decided cases based on the issues of the day.  It’s because the Constitution as written by the framers, is a living, breathing document, even all these years later.  It was written so it could be interpreted as needed; as the country changed over time.  That’s its brilliance; its ability to adapt.  Yes, there are the staunch Court conservatives, Scalia and Thomas but what most liberals don’t seem to understand, is both men are strict Constitutional interpreters.  They are no doubt conservative but in the Court, conservative means following the letter of the law.  What does the Constitution actually say.  They don’t believe in legislating from the bench.  Liberal justices on the other hand, find loopholes in the law.  They look for ways of interpreting the Constitution despite the fact the written word isn’t on the page.  Roe vs. Wade, which I strongly support, has no basis in constitutional doctrine, whatsoever.  The Burger Court in that case went out of its way to find legal grounds because it was necessary.  Women were dying from self-inflicted injuries.  Doctors were losing patients due to high risk pregnancies.  Same-sex marriage, under the Equal Protection Clause, has far greater legal standing.  So don’t be surprised if one or more of the conservative justices rules in a way contrary to what one might expect.  If there is legal Constitutional grounds for declaring DOMA Unconstitutional, the court will rule in favor of the challenges.  Too often people get caught up with the fact that rulings go against one side or the other.  When Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts ruled in favor of President Obama’s healthcare mandate, which could easily have gone the other way, no one on the left praised him or said, maybe it’s not always about party affiliation or conservative vs liberal.  Although Roberts votes with the conservative bloc nine out of ten times.  In this case, regardless of opinion, Roberts understood the need to move the issue of healthcare forward.  He absolutely could have ruled with the dissenters in this case so why didn’t he?   When these decisions are rendered, in all likelihood by the end of the June, no one should be surprised if the Court moves the country irreversibly forward in the direction of “Liberty and Justice for All.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s