LOG IN   JOIN   BLOG SEARCH   ALL DIARIES

Website Blog
Blog
Issues
Take Action
Videos
Donate
About
Youth Resources
My Sistahs
Advocates For Youth
 
Blog - Amplify your voice

Tuesday, January 5, 2010 at 8:37:00 AM EST

From Time Magazine

The legal case that gay-rights activists feared to see is about to get under way in a federal courtroom in San Francisco. For the next several weeks, plaintiffs will argue that the U.S. Constitution forbids states from restricting marriage to one man and one woman. The case has brought together some of the most powerful appellate attorneys in America, but has divided gay-rights lawyers and legal scholars who fear that even if successful, the case could set the issue on a collision course with a less-than-sympathetic U.S. Supreme Court.

And, of course, activists are pretty sure the Supreme Court is not going to recognize a right to same-sex marriage - and their ruling will set a bad precedent for the coming decades in the fight for equal marriage rights.

I am very interested to know what Amplify readers think about this.   Should the plaintiffs have waited? 

I don't know where I stand on this but I have to say I am feeling the one lawyer's pain here:

 "...No one urging us not to proceed could or would say when would be a good time to bring this case."

He's right - it does feel like the country/courts won't be "ready" for the lawsuit anytime soon. Do you think that justifies the plaintiffs proceeding with the case? 

Share this entry:  del.icio.us | Facebook |  MySpace | Digg It! | Tweet This
Comments
I know that, when confronted with difficult cases in which the decision would change the country, the Supreme Court often says that it will not take the case because of a legal issue or finds another way to avoid the issue entirely... they often don't like to rule on dividing issues of our time.  I wonder what will happen with this case.  They  might say that the ban is unconstitutional for another reason, for example.  I'm pretty convinced that the court will manage to rule this case without making a decision on gay marriage.  I think that it's important that the plaintiffs proceed anyway, if only because it's important to show that there are people in opposition to California's ban.
# Posted By cmartin626 | 1/5/10 09:35 AM | Report | Reply