I wanted to throw this up here because Im sure most of us will inevitably run across this article over the next few days–or at the very least be actively paying attention to the development of the Supreme Court’s ruling on Prop 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act. The author, Bill Mears, does a decent job of substantiating his prediction of what the Supreme Court will decide, and ultimately I feel he’s correct in assuming the court will likely “punt” on both cases.
Mears contends the justices will likely “DIG” it (dismissed as improvidently granted). In other words, the court will argue that they shouldn’t be making a ruling on the case, and rather the definition of marriage should be left to the states. What’s remarkable is he quotes an argument offered by our very own Sonia Sotomayor: “If the issue is letting the states experiment and letting the society have more time to figure out its direction, why is taking a case now the answer?”
Personally, Sonia Sotomayor’s quote is what got me all fired up. I feel it’s the courts duty to ensure that all of its citizens are properly and equally represented. Every American citizen should be afforded an equal opportunity under the law. Sonia Sotomayor’s argument is disingenuous in that it implies the rights of the LGBT community are not important enough to require immediate attention. I think Edie Windsor’s story (84 yr old grannie) highlights the importance of securing the LGBT community’s rights immediately. The judicial system should be progressive in ensuring the rights of all citizens are equally represented and people are afforded an equal opportunity, regardless of the stage of their life.
I can’t help but draw comparisons with the abolishment of slavery in the South, when our government actually had the cojones to stand up for the rights of all its people. President Lincoln took the country to war to ensure that basic civil liberties and freedom were afforded to African Americans (yes, I know there were many other factors).
1. We’ve all been a part of, or at least overheard, conversations involving the “perfect time to get married”; Should the American government have anymore say in this question when it involves a homosexual relationship rather than a heterosexual one? I guess what I’m getting at (and what Sotomayor backhandedly admits) is eventually prop 8 and DOMA will likely be found unconstitutional and repealed, but what if this isn’t for another 10 years?
2. Should the government (Judicial Branch) be more active in securing the rights of the LGBT community? If so, what are some benefits to having a nationally unified stance on gay marriage?
3. What are your over all thoughts about the article?