Not to mention the instant lawsuit. "If you can recognize them why not us."
The judges ruling covers this quite well. His ruling was for California, but it will end up covering the US. Civil unions/domestic partnerships are not equal to marriage in the eyes of the law.Originally posted by Ursus
Your right in that the ruling is a states case because that is where it has to start. What will make it federal, will be that they can only focus on the legitimacy of the state to set the standards. That ability will remain, but states will not be able to discriminate based on gender or sexual orientation. Similar in nature to the prohibition states have to sodomy laws, you can't outlaw or criminalize same sex sexual behavior. So yeah, you can set your own laws for indecency, but you can't single out a gender or sexual orientation. See? Its simple.Originally posted by TO
I also am about half way through the decision. The defense is made up of bungling idiots. That is why the SCOTUS will be in a hard position to overturn the judges ruling.
The talking heads pointed out last night that many of the issues will drop out and be moot. The most important points will stick. Those that say a state may not discriminate based on private morality.