Quote:First such prohibition to withstand a constitutional challenge since June 2013

Tennessee’s same-sex marriage ban has survived a constitutional challenge in court, the first prohibition to withstand such a challenge in almost 14 months.

Roane County Circuit Judge Russell Simmons ruled that “neither the Federal Government nor another state should be allowed to dictate to Tennessee what has traditionally been a state’s responsibility,” in ruling from last Tuesday, SCOTUSblog reports.

More than two dozen federal and state court rulings since the Supreme Court’s United States v. Windsor decision in June 2013 have successfully challenged and/or nullified bans. Simmons’ ruling rejects both a claim of discrimination and a claim that the Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit Clause forces the state to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

“The Supreme Court does not go the final step and find that a state that defines marriage as a union of one man and one woman is unconstitutional,” Simmons wrote. “Further, the Supreme Court does not find that one state’s refusal to accept another state’s valid same-sex marriage to be in violation of the U.S. Constitution.”

http://time.com/3101571/tennessee-same-s...e-rulings/

Proud to be a Tennessean!

I wonder why Lazy Gay and dbagjon haven't plastered this on the forum yet... Oh yeah, nevermind.

I'd like to say this is a big deal but it isn't. It seams to have happened in a State Court.

So if the Tennessee's law stands, can other states that have had their laws overturned rewrite their law to match Tennessee's law?

(08-12-2014 08:34 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  So if the Tennessee's law stands, can other states that have had their laws overturned rewrite their law to match Tennessee's law?

I don't see why not...

smn must be devastated

(08-12-2014 08:45 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(08-12-2014 08:34 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  So if the Tennessee's law stands, can other states that have had their laws overturned rewrite their law to match Tennessee's law?

I don't see why not...

No. that would not work. This is a state decision (Specifically a Roane County Circuit Court decision), but ultimately this decision will be decided by higher courts (either the federal circuit the state is in or the United States Supreme Court). A state's authority on Constitutional issues is superseded by federal rulings on those issues.

A court was bound to rule the other way at some point, but it is very telling that the vast majority of rulings, including nearly every federal court ruling has held that the state has no legitimate interest in failing to recognize valid same sex marriages performed in another state. If the circuits continue to unanimously hold the failure of a state to recognize a valid same sex marriage as unconstitutional, then the Supreme Court may not even hear the case (though they may decide to rule once and for all). However, if at some point there is a split among the circuits the issue will likely be decided by the Supreme Court.

(08-12-2014 09:19 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(08-12-2014 08:45 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(08-12-2014 08:34 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  So if the Tennessee's law stands, can other states that have had their laws overturned rewrite their law to match Tennessee's law?

I don't see why not...

No. that would not work. This is a state decision (Specifically a Roane County Circuit Court decision), but ultimately this decision will be decided by higher courts (either the federal circuit the state is in or the United States Supreme Court). A state's authority on Constitutional issues is superseded by federal rulings on those issues.

A court was bound to rule the other way at some point, but it is very telling that the vast majority of rulings, including nearly every federal court ruling has held that the state has no legitimate interest in failing to recognize valid same sex marriages performed in another state. If the circuits continue to unanimously hold the failure of a state to recognize a valid same sex marriage as unconstitutional, then the Supreme Court may not even hear the case (though they may decide to rule once and for all). However, if at some point there is a split among the circuits the issue will likely be decided by the Supreme Court.

Just because other states have recognized it doesn't mean others will, or would want to. That's why it should be left up to a vote in the state.

It all boils down to States Rights people. Just like before

Drew, are you apoplectic yet?

(08-12-2014 08:46 AM)Doctor Krieger Wrote:  smn must be devastated

You keep implying that I'm gay, like I give a sh!t. Continue to use homosexuality as an insult, you're doing wonders for the gay community.

BTW, I've been married....twice, to women who were born women and didn't have parts added or removed due to a conflict with their inner selves.

So what about you, have you found a husband yet?

(08-12-2014 10:00 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  Drew, are you apoplectic yet?

I'm actually glad...if all the cases go one way, there is little reason for the SCOTUS to step in and rule...if there is disagreement between the courts, SCOTUS is more likely to take up the case.

I think the left should be at least slightly concerned about how quickly the issue is going to make it back to the SCOTUS. Public opinion is shifting but the court is slower to shift and more conservative than the public.

This seems like more of a complaint about the Supreme Court than anything else. Maybe once they rule on it once and for all, all of this drama will stop and states will just have to deal with "gay" marriage (or, in other words, marriage).

(08-12-2014 09:47 AM)South Carolina Duke Wrote:  It all boils down to States Rights people. Just like before

The US Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land. People can scream "states rights" all they want, but in the end this is going to come down to how the Federal Circuits and possibly the Supreme Court interpret Same Sex Marriage bans and their application to the equal protection clause of the Constitution. States' Rights do not supersede the Constitution and at the very least a state will have to have a rational basis for not recognizing valid same sex marriage from other states. (it's also possible the courts will demand a higher standard than rational basis, based on marriage being a fundamental right).

(08-12-2014 11:36 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  I think the left should be at least slightly concerned about how quickly the issue is going to make it back to the SCOTUS. Public opinion is shifting but the court is slower to shift and more conservative than the public.

Maybe... at this point I'd still be mildly surprised if the Court hears the case as there is no split among the circuits as of right now. If a circuit split emerges the Court will almost assuredly hear the case (at least in terms of marriage recognition and the full faith and credit clause). That said, I'm becoming more and more convinced that valid same sex marriages will be recognized nationwide within the next 5 to 10 years.

Let each state decide by the voting booth.

(08-12-2014 12:14 PM)South Carolina Duke Wrote:  Let each state decide by the voting booth.

It's not that simple because there is this thing called the United States Constitution, which is the Supreme Law of the Land. Much of it has been applied to the states through the 14th amendment and states have always been subject to the full, faith and credit clause.

Interesting how the Constitution is paraded about and discussed at certain times but not others.

When our country defeated King George III, he made peace treaties with each individual colony, not a single treaty. Therefore, States Rights is the correct way to move on any and all matters.