Appeals Court Judge Mike Boudin.
Though the matter won't be fully resolved until an inevitable Supreme Court case, for now, a federal appeals court this morning ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional.
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston issued the ruling in a unanimous, 3-0 decision. Of particular interest is the fact that two of the appeals court judges are Republican appointees -- and the decision was written by Judge Mike Boudin, a traditional conservative appointed by George H.W. Bush, who was the deputy assistant Attorney General in the Reagan administration.
From today's decision:
To conclude, many Americans believe that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, and most Americans live in states where that is the law today. One virtue of federalism is that it permits this diversity of governance based on local choice, but this applies as well to the states that have chosen to legalize same-sex marriage. Under current Supreme Court authority, Congress' denial of federal benefits to same-sex couples lawfully married in Massachusetts has not been adequately supported by any permissible federal interest.
The full ruling is online here. The DOMA decision will be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which is widely expected to hear the case.
Leave a Comment:
The description of the judge as a "traditional conservative" is good. We should use that further. "Traditional conservative" for guys like this, Ronald Reagan folks, David Frum types, etc. And then use "movement conservative" against the whackos - to keep identifying them as the people who really aren't conservatives. It's either "movement conservative" or the more accurate "fascist," which people have problems with, so "MC" it should be. (Actually it's "bowel movement conservative" since they're so full of it)
1. Yay!
2. Cue the howler monkey brigade. "Activist RINO judges!" "Three men and a dog marriages!" "End of western civilization!"
You forgot "interfering with my religion," "What will happen to children in those households?" and [incorrectly] "imposing the will of the minority on everyone else" types of comments
That's a surprise, maybe they realize that people are starting to stand up and take notice as to which side their on. Or they finally remembered that they worked for the American people and not for themselves
*fistpump*
I was going to ask, are they simply judges in the classic sense (interpreting the law with the public equality in mind) or are they Kenyan activist judges who are trying to subvert our "Judeo-Christian Nation" with obaminations?
Good for the ruling although not good for the GOP as real judges are not an asset any more, they like truth, are now disposable liabilities..
The Defense of Money Act was misstated as marriage in an attempt to pander to the far reich of religious fundamentalists. I can not believe that all these politicians, pushing this bigoted legislation, feel that strongly about it especially since it is not directly a big payday for them except for the votes that keep them in power. I imagine they would be conveniently be for more food stamps if they had a couple of grocery store monopolies that were the sole access for food stamp shopping.
It seems to me that a lot of them don't know what they're doing or why, all the civil rights movements that went on here and are now going on abroad mean nothing to these people. They don't know how to think outside the box. They are making fools of themselves and they are doing it in front of the entire World. I hope other countries realize that most of us Americans have no idea where these unintellegient public officials came from. They are merely young rich children who have been given homework assignments that have no rhyme or reason. How did this great nation sink to this level? When they came up with a plan to exterminate us. God help us.
While I tentatively applaud the judges decision, I'll wait to see what the SC does with this. The current crop of hypocritical judges on the SC may actually let this stand if only because it isn't a corporation whose rights are being disenfranchised.
I've believe it when I see it. DOMA is almost farcically unconstitutional, but I have very little confidence in the Robert's court to ever to the right thing.
Now that really makes my day! I knew it was.
alas, as we saw in the ACA hearing, the current Sup Ct rightwing doesn't seem to care much if Circuit Court decisions were written by conservatives.
Cue the OUTRAGE! The GOP has already jumped all over these 'activist' judges.
Bu... Bu... But when the President spoke of "activist judges" the right was outraged! *rolls eyes*
Why is it that people on the right are not content to just be free to live their own beliefs ?
Why must people on the right wave the flag and constitution while they are stepping on the freedom of others to live their own beliefs ?
No one is telling people on the right they have to marry a gay person.
People in the center and on the left are just asking that gay people be given the right to marry.
I am so glad to know that Draconian, Radical, Right-Wing, Religious-Fanatics are a dying breed. They are having their last hurrah and will be disappearing into oblivion.
They never received the memo or the proper job training, their knowledge of History sucks too.
Right.
Also interesting to point out, I think, is that the 1st Circuit based its opinion on equal protection and federalism grounds. It also specifically did not use heightened scrutiny in its equal protection analysis (remember the President and the AG argued for use of heightened scrutiny in the case when declining to defend DOMA), but instead used a demanding form of rational basis review. Also interesting, is that the 1st Circuit affirmed the disctrict court's injunction, but maintained the stay of the inunction (it agreed that the federal agencies should not be able to enforce DOMA, but put such an order on hold) because it anticipate's that the Supreme Court will take up the case for review.
Nice 70's comb-over judge. That's truly conservative.