quote:Originally posted by cleome45: Since I was linking to this on another board anyhow, it occurred to me that folks here might want to see it as well:
quote:The Court rebuked Congress for BLAG’s argument that caution should be taken with issues that can be socially divisive: Here, too, this Court finds that Congress cannot, like an ostrich, merely bury its head in the sand and wait for danger to pass, especially at the risk of permitting continued constitutional injury upon legally married couples. The fact that the issue is socially divisive does nothing to relieve the judiciary of its obligation to examine the constitutionality of the discriminating classifications in the law.
A good message, but one I suspect will be lost on Obama and other so-called leaders.
cleome, Pres. Obama's Justice Department has already said that they find DOMA unconstitutional and won't defend it in court. The BLAG mentioned is the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group which Rep. Boehner started after the Justice Department said that they wouldn't be defending DOMA.
What is actually interesting about the opinion is the level of scrutiny the court used. I believe most of the marriage cases, even the ones in marriage equality favor, have used the rational basis level of scrutiny. That is the lowest level of scrutiny, and usually it ends up upholding whatever law is being challenged. With rational basis, the law must be rationally related to a government interest. With Heightened scrutiny the law "must advance an important governmental interest, the intrusion must significantly further that interest, and the intrusion must be necessary to further that interest."
-------------------- Five billion years from now the Sun will go nova and obliterate the Earth. Don't sweat the small stuff!
From: Boston | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
Hyperpath: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic | Subscribe To Topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
