Obama Evolves Even Further, Denies That State Marriage Bans Are Constitutional

[ProSense]

Obama Evolves Even Further, Denies That State Marriage Bans Are Constitutional

By Ian Millhiser

President Obama’s endorsement of marriage equality was an historic occasion, but he also qualified it somewhat by suggesting that states should continue to decide whether to discriminate against their citizens. In an interview released this morning with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos, the president indicated that his views on marriage have evolved even further. He now says that he cannot imagine how a state’s decision to discriminate against same-sex couples could be constitutional:

“Well, I’ve gotta tell you that — in terms of practical politics, what I’ve seen is a healthy debate taking place state by state, and not every state has the exact same attitudes and cultural mores. And I — you know, my thinking was that this is traditionally a state issue and — that it will work itself out,” he said. “On the other hand — what I also believe is that the core principle that people don’t get discriminated against — that’s one of our core values. And it’s in our Constitution.”

Stephanopoulos then asked whether Obama could imagine a circumstance wherein a state’s gay marriage ban could pass constitutional muster.

“Well, I can’t, personally. I cannot,” Obama responded. “That’s part of the reason I said, ultimately, I think that, same-sex couples should be able to marry. That’s my personal position. And, frankly, that’s the position that’s reflected — in the briefs that we filed — in the Supreme Court.”

This latest statement is exactly right. Marriage discrimination is unconstitutional because the Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment — which was ratified after the Civil War for the specific purpose of limiting the states’ ability to discriminate — provides that “No State shall . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The Constitution could not be more explicit that its protections against discrimination apply to state lawmakers.

- more -

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/03/13/1710771/obama-evolves-even-further-denies-that-state-marriage-bans-are-constitutional/

[tularetom]

1. I'm glad he's "evolved" on this issue, now how about evolving on the "deficit"

He's still drinking the Simpson Bowles kool aid when it comes to messing with SS and Medicare.

[NOVA_Dem]

2. I don't think he was EVER against gay marriage.

He would just go far enough on marriage equality so as not to cost him too many votes. When he thought that being pro marriage equality would hurt in the 2008 general he was for civil unions. I remember the issue with the anti-gay preacher (McClurkin) during the primary. In 2012 he still allowed for states to discriminate.

He's doing the right thing and that's the bottom line but the bottom line is moving towards marriage equality. I don't see a lot of bravery on the admin's part.

[ProSense]

3. Well, he's

making significant strides.

LGBT People Will Receive First-Ever Domestic Violence Protections Under VAWA
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022443504

Another big, bold stroke for gay rights
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022442960

Obama: Marriage Equality Should Be The Law Of The Land
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2013/03/01/1659551/obama-marriage-equality-should-be-the-law-of-the-land/

[ismnotwasm]

4. Good

Because they are not. They're vile bigotry, and we as a country need to get rid of it.