The Supreme Court already overturned bans on gay marriage. They did it in Obergefell v. Hodges. What are you talking about? The court could overturn Obergefell, but as of today gay marriage is not illegal in any state.
This is simply not true or at least not the full story. It is still illegal in many states and those bans have not been overturned, even if the laws are not enforceable it does not change the fact that gay marriage is illegal in those states. Additionally, in multiple states, judges can claim religious freedom to deny a gay marriage. They can claim that gay marriage is a violation of the constitution as it is institution a religion of secularism - I kid you not this is the logic being used. Therefore judges can refuse other people from getting marriage if it offends the judge. More "work-around" laws are being put into place to constrict gay marriage just like the right did with abortion. Obergefell v Hodges will ultimately be overturned by this court as well, reinstating the laws on the states book. Funny, it just seems like we saw this with abortion, and many people said that it's crazy to think the Supreme Court would overturn RvW.
Obergefell literally said that you cannot deny marriage to homosexual couples. California banned it by ballot initiative, and even that was overturned and gay couples get married here. "These considerations lead to the conclusion that the right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty. The Court now holds that same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry." I haven't seen a case on the matter, but I suppose an individual judge may refuse to marry a gay couple. So what? Go get married by someone else. Do you have any examples that would prevent a gay couple from getting married in any state? Okay. That doesn't change what either of us said. Currently, gay couples can get married in all 50 states. If they overturn Obergefell, it goes back to the states. I would say that Obergefell can be saved on equal protection grounds instead of substantive due process, and to the extent it was based on SDP it should be overturned. I thought it was inevitable. Eventually, there would be a majority of justices on the Supreme Court that said words mean what they say. I think Obergefell has a stronger foundation on equal protection grounds. It could be overturned, but the ground beneath it was not as shaky as that under Roe v. Wade. Griswold is more vulnerable, in my opinion.
There are dozens, mostly red states and states like Ohio. I read a good article on it - I'l try to dig it up but I need to get some sleep.
As I stated, states are working for workarounds to make it easier for a judge to say no. If you think there is no consequence to that, I think you should try talking to those who have been rejected a marriage license. I'll dig up the article I read tomorrow, I'm too tired to do it now. If I forget remind me. As for foundation, I think Roberts would agree with you potentially, but the other 5 - no way. They are going to scrap it the second a case comes before them. It really isn't about the law for them, it's about their beliefs and politics. I know you'd disagree with me here, but let's just revisit this when a case goes before the court.
My understanding is that even without Obergfell gay marriages might not be able to be performed in some states but would still have be recognized under the fair faith and credit clause. Whether Obergfell can be overturned I think the reasoning from Webb definitely puts it in danger. "Marriage" isn't in the Consitution either so many of the same arguments could apply.
This is tin-foil hat level batsh*t crazy. A top Wisconsin election official says Trump called him last week urging him to decertify Biden's 2020 election win in the state A Wisconsin election official says Donald Trump is still trying to overturn his 2020 electoral defeat in the battleground state. Robin Vos, the speaker of the Wisconsin State Assembly, said in a Tuesday interview that Trump called him last week and encouraged him to decertify Joe Biden's win in the state — 20 months after the 2020 election. Vos told WISN-TV 12 News in Milwaukee that Trump broached the topic after the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled absentee-ballot drop boxes in the state illegal earlier in July. "It's very consistent. He makes his case, which I respect," Vos told the news outlet. "He would like us to do something different in Wisconsin. I explained that it's not allowed under the Constitution." "He has a different opinion," Vos added.
Trump is such a despicable human being. He just can't quit trying to steal his way back into power. It's pathetic. He will never admit he was the big loser.
What Article I Section 8 enumerated power would that fall under? It is almost like the Congress has never read the Constitution. Were I in Congress, I would have voted against it too, just because it is wildly beyond the jurisdiction of Congress to legislate it.
What books has Congress banned? I must have missed that. You think the 9th Amendment EXPANDS the power of the federal government? I'm afraid sir, that you have made a terrible misreading of the Bill of Rights if you think the 9th Amendment gives Congress more powers.
How is legislation at the federal level that tells states what laws they are not allowed to pass not an expansion of federal power?
Unenumerated rights. Pick up a dictionary. Actually read the Constitution. Look up the reason why the 9th Amendment was added. Just educate yourself in general.
