View Single Post
Old 01-13-2010, 06:41 PM   #54
SuperFemme
Timed Out

How Do You Identify?:
Permanently Banned 10/24/2010
Preferred Pronoun?:
She.
Relationship Status:
Married (one of 18,000)
 
4 Highscores

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Atascadero, CA
Posts: 4,933
Thanks: 2,309
Thanked 7,108 Times in 2,327 Posts
Rep Power: 0
SuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST ReputationSuperFemme Has the BEST Reputation
Member Photo Albums
Default Yay Sotomayor.

A closer look at the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling indefinitely barring any broadcast of the Prop 8 trial shows the difference between the majority and dissenters boiled down to two things. The majority (Justices Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Kennedy and Scalia) concluded that Chief Judge Vaughn Walker did not follow federal law in changing rules to allow cameras in his courtroom for the trial, in large part because they believe he didn't allow enough time for public comment on changes to local federal court rules. And the justices also determined that Prop 8 supporters demonstrated there could be harm to their fair trial rights because certain witnesses could be intimidated by broadcast exposure, reason to keep the stay in place.


The dissenters (Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Stevens) couldn't have disagreed more. They said Walker easily followed the rules, and rejected the idea Prop 8's defense would suffer any harm. They called the decision an unprecedented attempt to "micromanage" a district court's administration.


Same-sex marriage advocates can only hope the justices don't break down along the same party lines if the main issue reaches the high court.
SuperFemme is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to SuperFemme For This Useful Post: