Quote:By a 2-1 vote, with Judge Jeffrey Sutton writing the opinion, the Sixth Circuit has upheld state prohibitions on same-sex marriages in the states of Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan, and Tennessee. Given that four other circuits have come out the other way, and that same-sex marriages are proceeding in 32 states, this is the case that produces the circuit split likely to be resolved by the Supreme Court.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volok...iage-bans/

From the opinion.

Quote:The signature feature of rational basis review is that governments will not be placed in the dock for doing too much or for doing too little in addressing a policy question. In a modern sense, crystallized at some point in the last ten years, many people now critique state marriage laws for doing too little — for being underinclusive by failing to extend the definition of marriage to gay couples. Fair enough. But rational basis review does not permit courts to invalidate laws every time a new and allegedly better way of addressing a policy emerges, even a better way supported by evidence and, in the Michigan case, by judicial factfinding.

If legislative choices may rest on “rational speculation unsupported by evidence or empirical data,” Beach Commc’ns, 508 U.S. at 315, it is hard to see the point of premising a ruling of unconstitutionality on factual findings made by one unelected federal judge that favor a different policy. Rational basis review does not empower federal courts to “subject” legislative line-drawing to “courtroom” factfinding designed to show that legislatures have done too much or too little. Id.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volok...iage-laws/

up until now you have had a long string of victories for gay marriage...so SCOTUS had no reason to step in...this changes that and creates discrepancy in the rulings, and may force SCOTUS to step in and rule...very interesting, and may end up a shallow victory for conservatives.

I remember when people in favor of "gay marriage" said that this should be a "states' rights" issue…

What happened to that?

(11-06-2014 06:27 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I remember when people in favor of "gay marriage" said that this should be a "states' rights" issue…

What happened to that?

Do you have any links with them saying that?

Seems like the state rights argument is something new and coming from politicians who've been against gay marriage in the past but realize the end is near.

(11-06-2014 06:58 PM)ODUChm Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 06:27 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I remember when people in favor of "gay marriage" said that this should be a "states' rights" issue…

What happened to that?

Do you have any links with them saying that?

Seems like the state rights argument is something new and coming from politicians who've been against gay marriage in the past but realize the end is near.

Andrew Sullivan said that over and over again in past years. Not recently, to be sure.

(11-06-2014 06:27 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I remember when people in favor of "gay marriage" said that this should be a "states' rights" issue…

What happened to that?

You don't vote on civil rights...

(11-06-2014 07:22 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 06:27 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I remember when people in favor of "gay marriage" said that this should be a "states' rights" issue…

What happened to that?

You don't vote on civil rights...

Where does the list of civil rights reside?

(11-06-2014 09:11 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 07:22 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(11-06-2014 06:27 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I remember when people in favor of "gay marriage" said that this should be a "states' rights" issue…

What happened to that?

You don't vote on civil rights...

Where does the list of civil rights reside?

In Anthony Kennedy's desk, I hope...

This shouldn't be any of the governments damn business.