LGBT Orgs: don't file lawsuits leading to SCOTUS now

LGBT Orgs: don't file lawsuits leading to SCOTUS now

LGBT Organizations Warn that Lawsuits Could Set Back Progress on Marriage for Same-Sex Couples

New York, May 27, 2009 - In response to the California Supreme Court decision allowing Prop 8 to stand, four LGBT legal organizations and five other leading national LGBT groups are reminding the LGBT community that ill-timed lawsuits could set the fight for marriage back. The groups released a new publication, "Why the ballot box and not the courts should be the next step on marriage in California." This publication discourages people from bringing premature lawsuits based on the federal Constitution because, without more groundwork, the U.S. Supreme Court likely is not yet ready to rule that same-sex couples cannot be barred from marriage. The groups also revised "Make Change, Not Lawsuits," which was released after the California Supreme Court decision ending the ban on marriage for same-sex couples in California. This publication encourages couples who have legally married to ask friends, neighbors and institutions to honor their marriages, but discourages people from bringing lawsuits.

"Why the ballot box and not the courts should be the next step on marriage in California" is available at http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pdfs/why_the_ballot_box.pdf

"Make Change, Not Lawsuits" is available at (PDF) http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pdfs/make_change_not_lawsuits-0509_update.pdf (PDF)

<snip>

I smell something very very fishy. Why is Theodore Olson representing gay and lesbian couples in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case? According to Wikipedia, Olson belongs to the Federalist Society. Wikipedia also says "The (Federalist) society was begun by a group including Edwin Meese, Robert Bork, Ted Olson and Steven Calabresi, and its members have included Supreme Court justices Antonin Scalia, John Roberts, Jr. and Samuel Alito. All of these individuals are conservatives, and nearly all have served in Republican administrations."

More:
http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/11174/lgbt-orgs-dont-file-lawsuits-leading-to-scotus-now

to claim death benefits to which he is rightfully entitled?

its specifically scotus related

The losing side, whoever that is, is likely to appeal it to the Supreme Court.

In fact, it's beginning to stink like last Friday's fish left laying out on the counter too long!

I realize many Republicans are whores, and will do anything for the almighty buck, but this seems a bit too much in my opinion.

likely have NO intention of really wanting to win, in my humble opinion.

that if it made it to the Supreme Court, Kennedy would be on the side of the 4 Lefties on the Court. He sided with them in Romer v. Evans. And, the current situation is more obvious than Romer was.

Our so-called "leadership" in the LGBT community has become a rather sad sack of spineless do-nothings. Not unlike the Democratic congress. They are always about being nice and fitting in. "Now is not the right time" is always what they tell us. Don't show actual gay people in anti-Prop. 8 commercials, they decide. Everything must be watered down and safe. Sometimes i wonder if they really want us to move ahead or if they just want to keep the status quo because that's where their bread is buttered.

:applause: Beautiful response. We have a huge problem with leadership in our community. That we are run by a bunch of spineless do-nothings hits the nail on the head.

The more states we pass marriage equality in, the better case we will have on the bigger stage.

I trust NCLR, The Task Force and LAMBDA Legal with this one.

especially with the current makeup of the court. We know we've got four rock-solid votes against us. So, after that, it's a crapshoot.

The other problem is that 99.9 percent of cases are decided at the appellate level and Bush and company packed the appellate bench with hard-core right-wing activist judges. We could get an adverse ruling there and then SCOTUS could just refuse to hear it -- to save themselves from having to make this type of decision. And we'd be screwed.

is that it is an open admission -- as is the kerfuffle over the new justice -- that our Supreme Court is corrupt. It doesn't make decisions based on law or a sense of justice, but on the political advocacy positions of the justices.

Apparently, the gay leaders see it this way. The right wing, with its insistence on litmus tests for justices, sees it this way.

It's a fucking joke.