Justice Ginsburg calls for equality for gays

[alp227]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

(09-15) 21:20 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, speaking to law students in San Francisco, called Thursday for equality for gays and lesbians and said the court should return to a 1972 ruling that halted executions nationwide.

"We should not be stopped from pursuing whatever talent God has given us simply because we are of a certain race, a certain religion, a certain national origin, a certain gender or gender preference," Ginsburg said at UC Hastings College of the Law.

The court has adopted constitutional barriers against discrimination based on all those categories except sexual orientation. It could confront that issue in one of several cases now pending in lower courts, including a challenge to California's ban on same-sex marriage that is awaiting review by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

The justices struck down state laws against gay and lesbian sexual activity in 2003 without deciding how to review other laws that treat people differently based on sexual orientation. Referring to that case, Ginsburg said the court "recognized that consensual relations between two people do no harm to anyone and cannot be subject to government prohibitions."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/15/BAHD1L5CNN.DTL

[midnight]

1. K&R

[mr_liberal]

2. She should retire. nm

[boppers]

3. Why?

My grandfather died at 98, sharp as a tack, and she's 20 years younger than that.

[ruggerson]

5. she has pancreatic cancer

Obama might not be reelected and if a rightwinger gets her seat, we're all screwed.

[Pab Sungenis]

17. Look at what happened when John Paul Stevens thought that.

If she can make it until 2017, she should.

[mr_liberal]

21. She already said she's going to retire when she's 82.

thats during the next Presidents first term.

i guess she could change that and stay on if its Perry or Romney, but if she would like to retire that soon, why wait? Its just a couple years. She might as well just go now.

She is risking having to retire and be replaced by someone like Rick Perry. If that happens the people that are saying she should keep going will feel differently then.

Im not the only one saying this. There's been articles written by liberal scholars saying she should retire too.

The senate is Democratic controlled now too, it probably wont be after 2012. Obama would have trouble getting someone through, and a republican president would get whoever they want.

Edit: It may not be 2017 either, the next president could have two terms if its a republican, thats potentially 8 years.

[defendandprotect]

4. Good for Ginsburg -- an "activist" re human rights -- !!!

[RZM]

6. What are the predictions of the Supreme breakdown should they hear the 9th circuit case?

Sounds like Ginsburg would be yes. I know Kagan would be and I'm guessing Sotomayor would be as well. Are there two more?

[Unvanguard]

8. if you mean the Perry case, the answer is probably "no."

My strong suspicion is that Kennedy would vote to uphold Prop. 8, especially if he thought it was necessary to avoid a ruling generally invalidating same-sex marriage bans nationwide. But opinions differ.

[RZM]

10. So I guess Breyer is a solid 'yes' then?

Funny how so many important decisions in this country turn on what Anthony Kennedy thinks. But nothing's perfect, I guess.

[Unvanguard]

"Solid" is strong, but I suspect he's a yes.

He's more of a moderate than Ginsburg on some issues, but not on this one, I think.

[Unvanguard]

11. Duplicate. n/t

[Pab Sungenis]

16. Kagan would be a guaranteed "no."

1. As Solicitor General, you would be charged with defending the Defense of Marriage Act. That law, as you may know, was enacted by overwhelming majorities of both houses of Congress (85-14 in the Senate and 342-67 in the House) in 1996 and signed into law by President Clinton.

a. Given your rhetoric about the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy—you called it “a profound wrong—a moral injustice of the first order”—let me ask this basic question: Do you believe that there is a federal constitutional right to samesex marriage?

Answer: There is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage.

b. Have you ever expressed your opinion whether the federal Constitution should be read to confer a right to same-sex marriage? If so, please provide details.

Answer: I do not recall ever expressing an opinion on this question.

So we know Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, Kagan: No. Even if we get Kennedy, Breyer, and Sotomayor to vote Yes, we've lost it.

[No Elephants]

20. Self Delete

[xchrom]

7. Love her. Nt

[Unvanguard]

9. Her majority opinion in CLS v. Martinez is a gem.

I'm very glad she's on the Court. Kagan and Sotomayor are wonderful too.

[Firebrand Gary]

12. In the history of the high court, Ginsburg is by far my favorite justice.

[DesertFlower]

13. i agree. nt

[polmaven]

14. I just LOVE that woman!

She is such a wonderful example of absolute justice that this country should admire. She is what this country should strive to be.

[Pab Sungenis]

15. Bravo.

Now if only her fellow women on the Court would both say it.

[blueclown]

18. She is a national treasure.

We'll take our chances with her staying on the court, even if President Obama doesn't win the election in 2012.

[SoapBox]

19. Bravo Justice Ginsburg!

Thank you for saying it...and not being scared off by the GOPBaggers / T.Haters.