The coolest place on the internet, according to this tagline.
AskArchiveFAQ

June 30, 2013
They lost in the district court, they lost in the court of appeals and they’ve lost in the United States Supreme Court. And I think we’ll be better off in this country if we stopped doing this sort of thing that is divisive and is hurting people who live next door, who work for us, who are our cousins and brothers and sisters.
Former Solicitor General Ted Olson • Discussing an effort by opponents of same-sex marriage to stop the issuance of marriage licenses in the state of California, which started back up on Friday. The move was quickly batted away, without comment, by Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy on Sunday, though opponents could try asking another Supreme Court justice to consider the move. Olson argued in favor of proponents of same-sex marriage in court.
14:26 // 1 year ago
June 29, 2013

How the Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage rulings are affecting state politics

  • changing gears Politicians in a number of states, most notably Oregon, Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania, have started discussing repealing laws which bar same-sex marriage in the state, whether through laws or through amendments. (29 states have amendments similar to the one struck down in California.) In the case of Oregon, the state’s Democratic governor, John Kitzhaber, argues that the federal ruling underscores the urgency of the issue. “Oregon has not yet lived up to the ideal of equal rights for all,” he stated. A court decision in Michigan involving a same-sex couple adopting one another’s children could also play a factor in that state—that decision was on hold due to the Supreme Court decisions.
  • doubling down In the case of West Virginia and Indiana, however, Republicans in the states are considering strengthening state laws barring same-sex marriage through the usage of amendments. One advocate in Indiana, the American Family Association of Indiana’s Micah Clark, argues that the decision should be left up to voters. “The future of marriage matters,” he told the Associated Press. “And it belongs in the hands of Hoosier voters, not the courts, not Hollywood, and not the activists seeking to change it from what it is and always has been.” source
11:15 // 1 year ago
June 28, 2013
18:56 // 1 year ago
June 26, 2013
They are all watching a network not to be named, George, and for whatever reason there is a delay, and so when they hear it they are going to, trust me, erupt and you and I won’t be able to hear each other.
California Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom • Offering a comment to ABC News regarding the Prop 8 Supreme Court decision, which he learned about from the reporter who contacted him. Why’s that? Well, here’s the thing: CNN, which famously got burned by a Supreme Court ruling last year, has been playing it extra cautious this time around, so much so that all of the other networks had the decision long before CNN did. And Newsom’s staff was watching CNN for the news. Hear that? That’s what overcompensation sounds like. Classic Zucker.
21:50 // 1 year ago
evanfleischer:

Well played, Google.

Clever.

evanfleischer:

Well played, Google.

Clever.

10:43 // 1 year ago
10:42 // 1 year ago
The Ninth Circuit was without jurisdiciton to consider the appeal. The judgment of the Ninth Circuit is vacated, and the case is remanded with instructions to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

SCOTUSblog

California gays can get their marriage on again. 

(via waitingonoblivion)

It’s not everything that same-sex marriage proponents wanted—it avoids a ruling on the larger issue, for one thing—but it’s a victory nonetheless.

(via waitingonoblivion)

10:32 // 1 year ago
This case is about power in several respects. It is about the power of our people to govern themselves, and the power of this Court to pronounce the law. Today’s opinion aggrandizes the latter, with the predictable consequence of diminishing the former. We have no power to decide this case. And even if we did, we have no power under the Constitution to invalidate this democratically adopted legislation.
Antonin Scalia, in his DOMA dissent.
10:20 // 1 year ago
DOMA singles out a class of persons deemed by a State entitled to recognition and protection to enhance their own liberty.
The majority opinion in the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act. SCOTUS has decided DOMA is unconstitutional. Read more at NPR’s The Two-Way. (via npr)

This seems like a pretty historic one right here.
10:14 // 1 year ago
For same-sex couples who wished to be married, the State acted to give their lawful conduct a lawful status. This status is a far-reaching legal acknowledgment of the intimate relationship between two people, a relationship deemed by the State worthy of dignity in the community equal with all other marriages. It reflects both the community’s considered perspective on the historical roots of the institution of marriage and its evolving understanding of the meaning of equality.

The United States Supreme Court (via theweekmagazine)

From the DOMA decision.

10:12 // 1 year ago