My first reaction to today's rulings on gay marriage was a slight disappointment. It was expected that they were going to kill the Defense of Marriage Act so, while welcome, it wasn't a surprise. The disappointment grew out of the fact that I had still held out some small hope that on the California case, they would issue a broad ruling that there was no constitutional basis for denying same sex marriage anywhere in the U.S. Alas, it was always a long shot.
I think there were three possible outcomes, and while we didn't get the best one, we also avoided the worst...which would have been a narrow ruling on the California case that upheld the Appeals Court, but pointedly did not find a broader constitutional right to same sex marriage.
It seems like this ruling that the plaintiffs in the California case did not have standing will reverberate favorably as the rest of the state dominoes continue falling. It will discourage groups who would otherwise be inclined to challenge court findings. While the Supremes didn't rule on the merits of the case, I would think it might also discourage groups in other states from trying to put their own versions of Prop. 8 on the ballot.
Hypocrisy note: in his dissent, Scalia snarled about the majority having " an exalted notion of the role of this court in American democratic society" because of their willingness to ignore the will of Congress. This comes on the heals of the ruling that gutted the Voting Rights Act in which he was part of the majority. The VRA has had over 50 years of congressional support, having been renewed four times after its initial passage in 1965. There is a hell of a lot more will of the congress in the VRA than there ever was in DOMA.
Scalia increasingly seems to be just another angry old white guy who sees the world passing him by.
No comments:
Post a Comment