BREAKING: Federal Judge Upholds Louisiana's Ban On Same-Sex Marriage

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Last edited Wed Sep 3, 2014, 02:19 PM - Edit history (2)

Source: JoeMyGod, via Associated Press

Via the Associated Press:

A federal judge has upheld Louisiana's ban on same-sex marriages, as well as the state's refusal to recognize gay marriages legally performed in other states. U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman's ruling Wednesday broke a string of 20-plus court wins for supporters of same-sex marriage since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act last year. Feldman said gay marriage supporters failed to prove that the ban violates equal protection or due process provisions of the Constitution. Feldman agreed with state attorneys who argued that states have the right to define marriage. A spokesman for a gay rights group said an appeal is planned.

Read more: http://www.joemygod.blogspot.com/2014/09/breaking-federal-judge-upholds.html

---

Here's the story from the AP:

Federal judge upholds La. same-sex marriage ban

And here's Martin Feldman:

Martin Leach-Cross Feldman

Yes, I was tempted to link to this Martin Feldman:

Marty Feldman.

ETA: from the Times-Picayune:

Louisiana gay marriage ban upheld by federal judge

By Andy Grimm, NOLA.com | Times-Picayune
on September 03, 2014 at 11:47 AM, updated September 03, 2014 at 12:35 PM

U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman issued a ruling Wednesday (Sept. 3) upholding Louisiana's ban on gay marriage, breaking a string of 20-plus court victories for supporters of same-sex marriage since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act last year.

A spokesman for the Forum on Equality, which represents three same-sex couples suing state officials over the ban, said the plaintiffs will appeal Feldman's ruling to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal.

Feldman's ruling includes upholding the state's refusal to recognize gay marriages legally performed in other states. ... Feldman said gay marriage supporters failed to prove that the ban violates equal protection or due process provisions of the Constitution. ... Feldman agreed with state attorneys who argued that states have the right to define marriage.

Feldman was nominated to the court in 1983 by President Ronald Reagan.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

[appleannie1]

1. Typical of a judge from Louisiana.

[msanthrope]

2. Reagan appointed tool.....

On June 22, 2010, Judge Feldman issued a preliminary injunction blocking a six month moratorium on deep-water offshore drilling in Hornbeck Offshore Services LLC v. Salazar. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs indicated that the Obama administration intended to immediately appeal the decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.[3]

Feldman's 2008 financial disclosure report[4] indicates that in that year, he owned stock in Transocean (worth under $15,000), the company that owned the Deepwater Horizon rig, as well as in other oil companies which would be affected by the moratorium.[5] A federal judge is required to consider recusal when he owns shares in one of the parties in the case before him, however none of the companies listed in Feldman's 2008 disclosure were directly involved in the action against Salazar.

Judge Feldman's 2009 financial disclosure report[6] indicates that he had financial investments in multiple BlackRock funds, each valued under $15000, much like the prior year. Although Blackrock was said to be the largest holder of BP stock,[citation needed] it's not clear that any of these funds held stock in BP. Feldman held stock in Exxon-Mobil during the hearing on the drilling moratorium and from June 8 to June 21, he issued several orders related to the moratorium case. On June 22, at the "opening of the stock market", he reportedly sold his Exxon-Mobil stock. Hours later, he issued his ruling lifting the moratorium.[7]

As of the June 9, 2010 amended complaint, Transocean, Black Rock, BP and Exxon-Mobil were not plaintiffs in the action.[8]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Leach-Cross_Feldman

[BlueCaliDem]

3. But isn't that unconstitutional and doesn't Federal law supercede State law?

I don't get it why this Federal judge isn't upholding the U.S. Constitution as he's sworn to do?

[totodeinhere]

11. The Supreme Court has not yet made a final definitive ruling on the issue.

n/t

[Lurks Often]

18. Federal Law does not always supersede State Law

I disagree with the ruling mind you. In theory the Congress can only create laws under the authority specifically granted to it under the Constitution. The grey area is that Congress is allowed to create laws based on a part of the 10th Amendment covering inter-state commerce, a clause the Federal government has used a lot to pass laws governing things that aren't strictly inter-state commerce.

Neither the states or the Federal government want a definitive ruling on the Commerce Clause, because such a removal would significantly impact either the states ability to pass their own laws or greatly restrict the Federal government's authority.

This will be appealed to the US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals

[uppityperson]

4. bah

[Mike Daniels]

5. "states have the right to define marriage"

Really? Let's see a state declare in 2014 that marriages are only valid if between people of the same race and we'll see how far that gets before being tossed out by a court.

[SoapBox]

6. Exactly!

I love how the Pukes, Baggers and Haters scream either states rights OR federal law.

They're a joke, with all their flip-flopping.

[Veilex]

16. "states have the right to define marriage"

No they don't... cause Commerce clause!
Lets see how they like that one.

[LynneSin]

29. States have the right to hold on to hate and discrimination

:eyes;

[dbackjon]

7. His legal reasoning shows he makes Clarence Thomas look like a genius

[Veilex]

15. I'm sure they're good buddies...

[blkmusclmachine]

25. I understand that Feldman is friends with Scalia.

[C Moon]

8. The GOP is grasping for a tree branch as it sinks in quick sand.

So out of touch and backwards.
It's amazing they can get as many into office as they do.

[TBF]

9. Will be appealed to the 5th Circuit -

not that the 5th Circuit is anything to write home about, but those judges do know they are being watched and I don't think they will be as careless as a district judge.

[blkmusclmachine]

26. The 5th is just more Feldmans. On to SCOTUS.

[TBF]

30. Yeah, I'm familiar with them -

probably being too hopeful.

[still_one]

10. on what grounds? this jerk will get overturned if it goes to the SC

[Generic Other]

12. Is he trying to force a Supreme Court ruling?

And is he using Dred Scott as a defense? Wasn't this a similar law? About other states recognizing one state's authority (note: not a legal expert).

[Veilex]

14. Wouldn't surprise me...

on either count. I hope he gets replaced, and soon.

[Veilex]

13. U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman clearly has failed to see the writing on the wall...

What a sad little man.

[dickthegrouch]

17. How much was the judge paid?

I'm sure his "premature" retirement was generously funded by some puke or other.

[ReRe]

19. It won't stand....

.... When is the Supreme Court going to finally rule on the side of the Constitution and deal with this once and for all?

[Louisiana1976]

20. Judge Feldman is a dipshit. He should be impeached.

[PDittie]

36. The case for Feldman's impeachment was made in 1010

The BRAD BLOG's legal analyst and attorney Ernie Canning offered a damning case for Feldman's impeachment in 2010, after he struck down the federal moratorium on off-shore drilling instituted in the Gulf of Mexico following the deadly 2010 BP oil disaster there.

As Canning detailed at the time, despite financial holdings in the oil industry that would have been directly affected by his own ruling, Feldman failed to properly disclose those conflicts of interest and recuse himself from the case.

"Despite having served as a federal judge for 27 years, Judge Feldman is unfit to sit in judgment of others," Canning wrote in response to the evidence in June of that year. "The only appropriate recourse is for a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, who takes his or her oath of office seriously, to introduce articles of impeachment against Judge Martin Leach-Cross Feldman."

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=10792

[valerief]

21. Of course, it does, cuz, hey, America. Jesus. nt

[NoMittens]

22. Boycott Louisiana?

Is it time to boycott Louisiana in response to this ruling? What does everyone think?

[Fortinbras Armstrong]

23. Isn't saying that Louisiana need not recognize gay marriages from other states

Going against the Full Faith and Credit clause?

[Amimnoch]

27. We need a bakery, catering service, or some other gay owned/operated business to get in this mix.

I'm thinking some gay operated/owned, or some gay friendly operated/owned business in Louisiana needs to refuse to provide services to a heterosexual couple where either of the couple is divorced, and base it on their belief that divorce is a sin.

I also think some legal team needs to take this ruling and challenge the state to dissolve every marriage for any heterosexual couple where either of the couple is infertile, and really tick people off by going after the marriages of conservative leaders who are found to have either a hysterectomy, or have had a vasectomy without children or children who are adults. Find out a conservative is taking birth control, married, and has no children.. go after the marriage to dissolve it. Find out a conservative is married, no children, and buying rubbers.. go after his marriage. After all, if the judgment is based on procreation alone.. then gay's aren't the only group that should be denied marriage rights.

Of course it's ridiculous, and will almost definitely be overturned in the first trial.. but it can then be used as case history to undeniably demonstrate the discrimination of the laws as written if it isn't applied equally.

[blkmusclmachine]

28. Hey, "judge," your prejudice is showing...

[Hissyspit]

31. Dumbass.

[Fla Dem]

32. Dipstick 80 year old judge appointed by Saint Ronnie, should have retired a long time ago. nt

[totodeinhere]

37. I disagree with his ruling too, and I am confident that it will eventually be overturned.

But having said that there is no reason to bring ageism in on this. There are plenty of 80 year olds who are as sharp as a tack. And we have several good intelligent posters at DU in that age group. The age of the judge has nothing to do with it.

[William769]

33. UN FUCKING BELIEVABLE!

[NorthCarolina]

34. The SCOTUS put a stay on the TN 4th Circuit ruling, now with this ruling

they may be able to use it to leverage a 5-4 decision against gay marriage. Who knows anymore really. Seems like a definite setup for something, as I seriously doubt this Judge came to these conclusions completely "independently".

[SoapBox]

38. I wonder how many gay couples have married in the U.S.?

...and the Gang of Five Terrorists would have the "brass" to declare those marriages null and void?

Now THAT would be some big brass.

[NorthCarolina]

39. True, but

the Citizens United ruling undoubtedly took "big brass" as well, and yet it is now the law of the land. I believe that gay marriage is far, far, far from a slam-dunk in the Roberts court, particularly in light of this judges ruling which I believe will carry far more weight with conservative justices than the cumulative total of recent rulings against marriage bans.

[baldguy]

35. RW judges have erased the first ten Amendments; now they're working on the other seventeen.