Gay marriage bans four stat upheld, Supreme Court review likely

Contents:

• OPN: A ‘CIRCU SPL’ WILL FORCE A LG ON GAY MARRIAGE
• WHY THE SUPREME COURT MAY HAVE TO RULE ON GAY MARRIAGE
• GAY MARRIAGE: A SPL AMONGST THE CIRCUS
• GAY MARRIAGE: A SPL AMONGST THE CIRCUS
• FIRG OF GAY CATHOLIC SCHOOL TEACHER ULD TT LATT SUPREME COURT LG
• WHY THE SUPREME COURT IS SUDNLY MORE LIKELY TO TAKE UP GAY MARRIAGE
• ONE COURT, THREE JUDG AND FOUR STAT WH GAY MARRIAGE CAS
• APPEALS COURT RESTAT GAY MARRIAGE BANS FOR THE FIRST TIME
• GAY MARRIAGE BAN CHALLENGED ILLOIS
• GAY MARRIAGE BANS FOUR STAT UPHELD, SUPREME COURT REVIEW LIKELY

OPN: A ‘CIRCU SPL’ WILL FORCE A LG ON GAY MARRIAGE

(Evan Vucci / AP) Supreme Court wonks, gay rights groups and the public were bemed last month when the Supreme Court cled to review feral appeals urt cisns strikg down state bans on same-sex marriage. More perplexg than the cisn not to hear the appeals was the fact that the urt allowed the cisns to go to effect, creatg “facts on the ground” as more gays and lbians tied the knot.

6th Circu Court of Appeals by a 2-1 vote upheld bans on gay marriage Michigan, Oh, Kentucky and Tennsee. This cisn creat the “circu spl” that was lackg when the urt passed on appeals om pro-gay-marriage lgs by the 4th, 7th and 10th Circu Courts of Appeal.

WHY THE SUPREME COURT MAY HAVE TO RULE ON GAY MARRIAGE

(Sutton did acknowledge that “gay upl, no ls than straight upl, are pable of raisg children and providg stable fai for them. The sooner ends, the better -- for long-sufferg gay upl, for the legal system and for the untry as a whole. Better, this stance, we thk, to allow change through the ctomary polil procs, which the people, gay and straight alike, bee the hero of their own stori by meetg each other not as adversari a urt system but as fellow cizens seekg to rolve a new social issue a fair-md way.

* It found that none of the bans adopted by voter-approved ballot measur  the four stat volved the s had been enacted out of hostily (“anim”) toward gays and lbians, but rather sought only to dify long-standg social norms about marriage, already reflected state laws. * It nclud that what the same-sex upl were seekg was a fundamental right to “gay marriage, ” and that do not exist unr the Constutn.

GAY MARRIAGE: A SPL AMONGST THE CIRCUS

The route of regnizg gay marriage through the Constutn, said, “do not exist. Gays and lbians, said, have not been regnized by the Supreme Court as a discrete class servg of special nstutnal protectn as historic targets of discrimatn.

” Victori by gay rights advot through iativ and legislatn, remarked, would lead to “greater acceptance” of those goals.

"Wdsor validated a feral law that refed to rpect state laws permtg gay marriage, while Baker upheld the right of the people of a state to fe marriage as they see , " Sutton wrote.

GAY MARRIAGE: A SPL AMONGST THE CIRCUS

Acrdg to the urt’s undisputed factual fdgs, Smh and her pany are “generally willg to create graphics or webs for lbian, gay, bisexual, or transgenr (‘LGBT’) ctomers, ” but “Ms. Furthermore, the urt found that the nature of webse sign is a unique service that is not fungible; therefore, a gay uple seekg servic om Smh uld not simply look elsewhere for the same service. On November 6th, those fightg for the right to gay marriage across the entire U.

FIRG OF GAY CATHOLIC SCHOOL TEACHER ULD TT LATT SUPREME COURT LG

S Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circu led agast the practice of gay marriage four stat (Kentucky, Michigan, Oh and Tennsee). Supreme Court to take up the issue of gay marriage once and for all. In fact, his article “Gay marriage lg means high urt review likely, ” Dan Sewell of the Associated Prs wr “Jtice Ruth Bar Gsburg had explaed a September speech Mnota that the lack of a spl the appeals urts ma Supreme review of the issue unnecsary.

Supreme Court cisn favor of a web signer who did not want to work for gay upl bolsters s fight the U.

Court of Appeals for the 4th Circu Richmond is an early tt of how that major Supreme Court cisn ptg ee speech agast anti-discrimatn laws will play out beyond the hypothetil suatn that se, which volved a platiff who had never actually ma weddg webs or been asked to do so by a gay person.

WHY THE SUPREME COURT IS SUDNLY MORE LIKELY TO TAKE UP GAY MARRIAGE

“The Court rejected the dissent’s assertn that s cisn opened the door to discrimatn employment, ” ACLU attorney Josh Block wrote a reply to Becket’s the exampl raised the Supreme Court did not clu a relig anizatn or a gay employee, and Gorsuch repeatedly voked a 2000 cisn allowg the Boy Suts to expel a gay volunteer on “exprsive associatn” grounds.

“We all said that thoands of relig anizatns all across the untry ask their employe to uphold their tradnal view of marriage word and ed, and if you terpret the statute that way, ’s gog to unleash lots of lawsus agast them, ” Goodrich the Supreme Court has specifilly said preventg racial discrimatn is a pellg ernment tert that jtifi rtrictg First Amendment eedoms, he noted that the Supreme Court has rejected such a fdg on discrimatn agast gay or transgenr people.

And why a feral appeals urt has upheld state bans on gay marriage. ByARIANE DE VOGUENovember 6, 2014, 6:23 PMGay rights advote V Tta wav a rabow flag ont of the Supreme Court Washgton, June 26, 2013. Stt Applewhe/AP Photo— -- For the first time sce the Supreme Court’s historic gay marriage lgs 2013, a feral appeals urt has upheld state bans on gay 2-1 lg by the 6th Circu Court of Appeals creat a circu spl the lower urts and means the Supreme Court is much more likely to take up the ’s lg ncerned marriage regnn bans Kentucky, Michigan, Oh and Tennsee.

ONE COURT, THREE JUDG AND FOUR STAT WH GAY MARRIAGE CAS

”In October, the Supreme Court refed to take up several other s alg wh the issue of whether stat n ban gay marriage. "Now there is such a spl, and ’s likely the Supreme Court will step Strang, staff attorney the ACLU Lbian Gay Bisexual and Transgenr Project, said a statement: "This cisn is an outlier that’s patible wh the 50 other lgs that uphold fairns for all fai, as well as wh the Supreme Court’s cisn to let marriage equaly lgs stand Indiana, Wisns, Utah, Oklahoma and Virgia.

APPEALS COURT RESTAT GAY MARRIAGE BANS FOR THE FIRST TIME

Sutton, one of the Bh appote and a likely swg vote among the three, repeatedly asked why gay rights advot wanted to e the urts to hasten an oute they were gradually wng through electns and chang attu. As they bated the s, all three judg and several lawyers referred repeatedly to the transformed legal landspe of the last year, which more than two dozen lower urts and two appeals urts have led that gay upl have a right to marry, and to the expectatn that the Supreme Court would soon hear the issue.

But she seemed to favor the right of stat to ban same-sex this urt were to le agast same-sex marriage, would create greater prsure on the Supreme Court to le on the issue to clear up the ntradictory cisns among appeals blz of heargs here “is a rult of the avalanche of feral urt cisns on marriage the last year, all of them lg the same way, ” said San Sommer, director of nstutnal ligatn for Lambda Legal, which helped to reprent gay upl om Oh who asked the state to regnize their marriag om other stat and put both parents’ nam on birth certifit. A send ccial issue Wednday’s heargs and urts across the untry is whether same-sex marriage is simply an expansn of a well-tablished fundamental right to marry reflectg shiftg social norms, and th worthy of nstutnal protectn, or whether gay upl “seek regnn of a new right, ” as Kentucky argued.

The hearg here was the third time this year that a feral circu urt, the last stage of appeal below the Supreme Court, has nsired whether gay upl had a nstutnal right to marry. A number of lower urts have overturned state rtrictns the year sce the Supreme Court overturned part of the feral Defense of Marriage Act, sayg stigmatized gay fai.

GAY MARRIAGE BAN CHALLENGED ILLOIS

Asked by Judge Dghtrey to expla why barrg gay men and lbians om marryg served this state tert, Leigh Gross Latherow, a private lawyer hired by Kentucky, said that “same-sex upl nnot procreate” and that only heterosexual upl, “who n procreate and we believe do procreate, ” should receive the state-sponsored benef of legal marriage. A versn of this article appears prt on, Sectn A, Page 15 of the New York edn wh the headle: One Court, Three Judg and Four Stat Wh Gay Marriage Cas.

GAY MARRIAGE BANS FOUR STAT UPHELD, SUPREME COURT REVIEW LIKELY

Judge Sutton stated the opn: “From the vantage pot of 2014, would now seem, the qutn is not whether Amerin law will allow gay upl to marry; is when and how that will happen. If appealed, the Sixth Circu cisn may prent a circu spl that uld e the Supreme Court to reach the issue of the legaly of gay marriage. The platiffs, 16 gay and lbian upl, may requt an en banc review of the cisn, meang that the issue uld be reviewed by the full urt before a requt for review to the Supreme Court of the Uned Stat is ma.

For employers loted Oh, Kentucky, Michigan and Tennsee, the cisn creat no change the manner which employers mt treat gay upl for purpos of employee benefs. ” In Thursday’s 2-to-1 cisn, by a panel of the Uned Stat Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circu, Ccnati, Judge Sutton said that appears almost evable that Amerin law will allow gay upl to marry. Gay rights groups and lawyers for the platiffs the four affected stat exprsed disappotment and anger.