One Comment

  1. The reasoning is interesting in both cases.

    The anti DOMA judgement is presented as “States Rights” issue – the Federal government should be be allowed to tell States they can not have Gay Marriage.

    And the anti Prop 8 judgement was no judgement at all – the Supreme Court of the United States did not rule on the Californian Constitution or the vote, it ruled that the people did not have “standing” to bring the case (they were just voters – what do they matter?).

    I understand that SC Judges rarely (if ever) care about the reasons they present for their judgements (the just decide what they want the result to be – then think how they can get there, the classic case is Chief Justice Roberts on Obamacare, he wanted to give in to Obama so he constructed an argument that allowed him to do so). However, the official reasons for these judgements are still interesting.

    For there has, officially, been no judgement in favour of Gay Marriage – neither judgement contains anything like that.

    I do not know whether the BBC says the above – as I do not read BBC stuff.



Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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