Page 2 - Doma Case News Today

The next day was the prop 8 before the supreme court. then senator hester came out in favor of same-sex marriage. then they heard doma case, and kay hagans turn. the next one, bob casey from pennsylvania, then senator tom carper, bill nelson from florida. two more, one from north dakota, joe donnelly of indiana. then tim johnson of south dakota toppled. thats 12 u.s. senators in three weeks evolving in rapid succession. that doesnt mean it is all of them. there are a few holdouts among senate de...

Then they heard the doma case, and kay hagans turn. the next one, bob casey from pennsylvania, then senator tom carper, bill nelson from florida. two more, one from north dakota, joe donnelly of indiana. then tim johnson of south dakota toppled. thats 12 u.s. senators in three weeks evolving in rapid succession. that doesnt mean it is all of them. there are a few holdouts among senate democrats, by a few, i mean three. mary landrieu, mark pryor, and joe manchin. and being among those three is an...

Rockefeller, mark warner, mark begich. the next day was the prop 8 before the supreme court. then senator hester came out in favor of same-sex marriage. then they heard doma case, and kay hagans turn. the next one, bob casey from pennsylvania, then senator tom carper, bill nelson from florida. two more, one from north dakota, joe donnelly of indiana. then tim johnson of south dakota toppled. thats 12 u.s. senators in three weeks evolving in rapid succession. that doesnt mean it is all of them. t...

Director of the cia. i am not going to meddle in the affairs of afghanistan. it was an interesting dynamic in terms of his assention to the cia director. whether the stories are true the white house feared that david petraeus would run for president against barack obama, i never thought that was in the cards ever. but it was clear to many here in the building that by putting him in the cia, he was somewhat pigeon-holed. you know? in michael gordons story in "the new york times." not only was he ...

Important. >> two of the courts most conservative justices raised pointed questions over the label of marriage itself and of the timing of this case. >> im curious, when did it become unconstitutional to exclude homosexual couples from marriage? 1701? 1868 when the 14th amendment was inducted. >> when did it become unconstitutional to prohibit interracial marriages? >> its just about the label in this case. >> the labels. >> its just about the label? >> it means something. >> sure. if you tell a...

Skeptical is used by the "wall street journal" about the question of whether or not this case should have been brought before the supreme court. they havent talked about the arguments this morning on the marriage act or doma. after tuesdays heated debate after californias proposition 8. activists on social media. no consensus on how the justices might act. questions and comments on the justices about the reluctances of same-sex marriage in all states. several focusing on the term standing. wheth...

The federal government, the obama administration, will not defend it and believes its unconstitutional and that is the one is that going to be argued today. theoretically they could say we dont know why we took this case because it is unstanding. >> gene, in the doma case, though, isnt the difference in terms of standing, its not the administration or the federal government defending doma. it is a group of lawyers put together by the speaker of the house, by the house of representatives. >> righ...

Pair and decide, okay, we will take these two cases and we are going to make our statement on gay marriage and where it is now? or will they sort of sever them and take sequentially? in other words, will this be the supreme courts statement on where we are and where we go on gay marriage? >> reporter: you know, i think thats is an excellent question. . i have to assume the answer is yes. i think they decided these two -- they evaluated these two cases as a pair when they decided to take them. th...

Torn, it doesnt quite know what to do. they dont want to have to deal with this question just yet. they are uncomfortable with the standings issue. the reason why they were having these conversations is because the governor of california, the attorney general of california decided they think proposition 8 is unconstitutional. they are not defending it. so a group of citizens got together to bring this challenge. so if the case goes down on standing, that would at least give the court the ability...

Institution that is new on cell phones and the internet? we do not have the ability to see the future. >> you are really asking because of the sociological evidence for us to go into uncharted waters and you can play with that metaphor. there is a wonderful destination. >> justice anthony kennedy who could be the swing vote here. we address the legal implications and he discusses what the case may mean for children of same-sex couples. >> there is an immediate legal injury or what would be a leg...