Gay marriage battles move to states

  • Article by: David Lauter Tribune Washington Bureau
  • Updated: June 27, 2013 - 11:12 PM

Campaigns set to follow rulings at Supreme Court.

  • 18
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
crystalbayJun. 28, 1312:54 AM

I couldn't be prouder that Minnesota has already made marriage equality a reality. Thank you, right wingers, for coalescing our values by your abortive attempt to alter the state constitution!

33
10
dtmonkeyboyJun. 28, 13 7:19 AM

Thank you Minnesota Family Council. If you hadn't pushed the people to decide MN would never have gay marriage. Never before has a group failed more spectacularly. You lost your popular vote and you cost Republicans control of the legislature....but more importantly you lost the hearts and minds of the people. Love always wins.

32
9
dtmonkeyboyJun. 28, 13 7:21 AM

33% of the pulsation lives in states allowing gay marriage. The apartheid must end. 50 in 5!,,,,,,,,,,,,it is time for the people to be free

28
8
dtmonkeyboyJun. 28, 13 7:22 AM

Support for gay marriage has been growing by about 4% per year. In just five years support will be at over 60% nationwide.

32
8
benleeJun. 28, 1312:24 PM

We now seem to be in the situation when a majority of the electorate in a state can pass a proposition (like California has TWICE), but if the state's politicians don't like that proposition, they can refuse to defend it in the federal courts!! So much for the power of the people. According to Justice Roberts, no one has the standing to defend a law enacted under a state's legal procedures for people to enact a piece of legislation through the referendum process. This is truly threatening to the whole idea that people can have some say in their state's laws if they don't approve of how their elected politicians are handling the state. This is wholly against the Constitution and the law of the land. The state of California, as well as 25 other states, have created the initiative process in order to give the PEOPLE of those states some power to enact provisions that the political elites don't like. This is something that everyone who cares about democracy to be concerned about regardless of what anyone might care about Prop 8. One day it could be an initiative backed by liberals that the state's leaders decide not to defend. Just as 0bama and Eric Holder created a very very bad precedent by refusing to defend a federal law that had been passed by Congress and signed by a president (Bill Clinton in the case of DOMA), these are precedents that could come back to bite liberals one day if a conservative is in power and decides not to defend liberal initiatives or laws. And WOW! Can't you just hear liberals screaming for IMPEACHMENT! NOW! if THAT ever happened!

5
25
benleeJun. 28, 13 1:28 PM

Actually, (but not to be HYPOCRITICAL or anything) the push for this recognition of gay marriage SHOULD also carry the same push for universal right to carry; each and every state must recognize carry permits of any state. It is difficult to argue for gay rights on a Constitutional basis, while denying carry permits on the very SAME basis.....[sigh] but we all know hypocrisy has never stopped democrats, don't we?

8
22
jimdogJun. 28, 13 3:34 PM

"Just as 0bama and Eric Holder created a very very bad precedent by refusing to defend a federal law that had been passed by Congress and signed by a president (Bill Clinton in the case of DOMA), these are precedents that could come back to bite liberals one day if a conservative is in power and decides not to defend liberal initiatives or laws".................... I hope you realize that the Obama administration still enforced DOMA. They only refused to defend the constitutionality of it in Federal courts. Other President's of both parties have done this in the past. It wouldn't make much sense to defend a law that you believed as unconstitutional.

19
5
scubadoo68Jun. 28, 13 4:36 PM

"Just as 0bama and Eric Holder created a very very bad precedent by refusing to defend a federal law that had been passed by Congress and signed by a president (Bill Clinton in the case of DOMA), these are precedents that could come back to bite liberals one day if a conservative is in power and decides not to defend liberal initiatives or laws"---I believe the Supreme Court did the right thing. Our representatives our elected officials. If they did something truly reprehensible, they'd be voted out in the next election. That may happen in California, but highly doubt it.

14
3
Wally_99Jun. 28, 1310:16 PM

Thank GOD for States' rights in our Constitution. We are a representative republic. Not a democracy. The 30+ states that have emphatically REJECTED gay marriage will stay that way. For the long haul.

5
15
martytoilJun. 28, 1310:27 PM

benlee--I suppose that you would also call the north beating the south in the civil war unconstitutional? You do know the the voters in southern states voted to keep slavery.

14
3

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT