Supreme Court Legalizes Gay Marriage Nationwide

**DetroiterOnTheWestCoast** · June-26-15, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by gnome

Mackinaw is correct. Almost 60% of Michigan voters voted to change the Michigan constitution and ban same-sex marriage during the Granholm years.

those are facts. Michigan voters were clear in their opinion and the Governor was required to follow the constitution of the State.

No, he CHOSE to defend an unconstitutional provision. To retain his cred with his right flank. He could, perhaps, have decided to follow the path of the US attorney general or governor and attorney general of my adopted state of CA. He absolutely did not "have to" do this.

**gnome** · June-26-15, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by DetroiterOnTheWestCoast

No, he CHOSE to defend an unconstitutional provision. To retain his cred with his right flank. He could, perhaps, have decided to follow the path of the US attorney general or governor and attorney general of my adopted state of CA. He absolutely did not "have to" do this.

It was not unconstitutional until this morning. You know that. This morning.

When Snyder was sworn in he gave an oath to defend the Constitution of Michigan. That Constitution was amended by the a large plurality of voters to ban same-sex marriage.

Who wants a Governor to pick and choose which part of the Constitution to follow?

**iheartthed** · June-26-15, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by gnome

It was not unconstitutional until this morning. You know that. This morning.

The constitution didn't change last night. It was unconstitutional last night too.

**gnome** · June-26-15, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

The constitution didn't change last night. It was unconstitutional last night too.

Explain that for me, please. If your point is that the same-sex marriage ban was wrong from the beginning, I would agree, but being wrong and being ruled unconstitutional are different.

it is my understanding that the rulings from SCOTUS are not in effect until it is read in court. Do I misunderstand something?

**iheartthed** · June-26-15, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by gnome

Explain that for me, please. If your point is that the same-sex marriage ban was wrong from the beginning, I would agree, but being wrong and being ruled unconstitutional are different.

it is my understanding that the rulings from SCOTUS are not in effect until it is read in court. Do I misunderstand something?

The SC found that gay marriage is protected under the 14th amendment, which was ratified in 1868, so that's actually when gay marriage became legal. The ruling today just clarifies for everybody under the jurisdiction of the U.S. federal laws that it is indeed a protected right in the constitution.

The state AGs could have decided on their own that the law was indefensible and not pursued it to that level [[I believe California declined to appeal after the law was struck down in the lower federal court). However, they probably did gay marriage supporters a favor by doing so. It puts the issue to rest once and for all.