Gay Marriage May Face Setback in Federal Court

Image: Gay Marriage May Face Setback in Federal Court (Mark Makela/Reuters/Landov)

Thursday, 07 Aug 2014 07:10 AM

By Elliot Jager

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
|  A   A  
  Copy Shortlink
Two federal appeals courts have ruled that states may not ban same-sex marriage. Now, the more conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit in Cincinnati may decide that states have the prerogative of defining marriage as between man and women, The Washington Post reported.

If the appellate courts come to opposite conclusions — other appeals courts are expected to hear similar challenges — the U.S. Supreme Court will come under pressure to intervene and make a definitive ruling.

The legal dispute is whether the 2013 Supreme Court decision, U.S. v. Windsor, requiring the federal government to recognize same-sex marriages performed in states where they are legal, means that same-sex marriage is a fundamental right and that more traditional states may not ban such unions.

The Cincinnati panel is composed of judges Jeffrey Sutton, Deborah Cook, and Martha Craig Daughtrey.

During oral argument, Sutton queried lawyers for same-sex couples as to why they preferred to put their hopes in five votes of the Supreme Court rather than capturing the "hearts and minds" of their fellow Americans, according to the Post.

Their lawyer, Alphonse Gerhardstein, replied that fundamental rights should not hinge on popular approval, the Post reported.

Sutton and Cook were nominated by president George W. Bush. Daughtrey was nominated by President Bill Clinton. Daughtrey made it clear she supports gay marriage, according to the Post. Cook appeared to side with the states and opponents of single-sex marriage.

Sutton's comments left it unclear which way he would go, the newspaper reported. He is known for his judicially conservative temperament and formerly was a clerk for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Sutton disappointed conservatives with his ruling that the Affordable Care Act was constitutional.

Regarding the present case, Sutton said it boils down to whether states were empowered to define marriage. He noted that the Supreme Court's message in Windsor, while ambiguous, seemed to lean toward the protection of gay rights, the Post reported.

Related Stories:

© 2014 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
  Copy Shortlink
Around the Web
Join the Newsmax Community
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.
>> Register to share your comments with the community.
>> Login if you are already a member.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
Email:
Country
Zip Code:
Privacy: We never share your email.
 
Hot Topics
Follow Newsmax
Like us
on Facebook
Follow us
on Twitter
Add us
on Google Plus
Around the Web
Top Stories
You May Also Like

Letters Reveal Left-Wing Activist's Role With Young Hillary

Monday, 22 Sep 2014 15:48 PM

As Hillary Clinton recasts herself as a moderate Democrat, recently uncovered letters between the potential presidential . . .

Immigration Expert: De Blasio's ID Cards Are a Public Safety Hazard

Monday, 22 Sep 2014 14:40 PM

The identification cards being offered to illegal immigrants in New York City by Mayor Bill de Blasio pose a serious pub . . .

Ferguson Police Offered Class on Managing Media: 'Feeding the Animals'

Monday, 22 Sep 2014 14:19 PM

In the aftermath of the shooting of a black teenager and riots in Ferguson, Mo., the St. Louis Police County and Municip . . .

Most Commented

Newsmax, Moneynews, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, NewsmaxWorld, NewsmaxHealth, are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

 
NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
©  Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved