[Kilian]

There is a federal challenge to California's prop 8 making its way through the courts.

This article:
http://cbs13.com/politics/gay.marriage.lawsuit.2.1021042.html
claims:
at the U.S. Supreme court,
“a favorable ruling would allow gays and lesbians to get married in every state,”
just as the court's 1967 ruling in a Virginia case outlawed prohibitions on interracial marriage…..which legalized interracial marriage across the nation.


Is that claim true, false, or unknown?


The impact it would have is:


A. The article’s claim is correct.
Favorable ruling at SCOTUS = Gay marriage nationwide

B. It wouldn’t open the door to legalizing gay marriage.
All it would do is close the door to banning it.
All it would do is strike down every state constitutional ban on it.

C. Depends on what grounds the court bases its decision and how broad its holding is.


Which is it? A? B? or C?

 

[espowyes15]

C.

The Court could rule at one extreme that not extending the definition of marriage to include gay couples is a violation of their Constitutional right to equal protection. That would invalidate the Federal "Defense of Marriage Act", and any State law that restricted marriage to heterosexual couples.

At the other extreme they could strike down Prop 8 on some very narrow procedural issue, in such a way that it only applies to the CA case.

Richard

 

[Kenrik]

I select C.

Take the case of Lawrence vs. Texas. Consensual sodomy in Texas was struck down as unconstitutional. Other states that had such laws on the books had their laws struck down.

It all depends two things: Which precedents the SCOTUS uses to make its ruling assuming SCOTUS agrees to hear such a case.

Which legal theory the plaintiffs are suing under.