Live Breaking News & Updates on Unaccountable Supreme Court
Stay updated with breaking news from Unaccountable supreme court. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
Divide believe it is sort of a last resort for the elected, unaccountable supreme court to protect the process. they only want to step in if there is absolutely no doubt that a law violates the constitution. so that that rhetoric of letting the democratic process go forward is something you hear a lot in the supreme court. you heard it today. but also you heard the solicitor general saying sure, the democratic process is fine but when it violates people s rights, this is when the justices have to step in. four justices seem quite willing to step in, the four democratic appointees. they didn t seem to have a fifth vote on the issue, but probably had a fifth on the issue of state s rights. jeff, stay with us because i want to move into another issue that came up and also the ....
The majority of americans were ready but we re not here to do what s popular or do what the majority of people think is right. that is the baltimore ravens who is a leading advocate on the lgbt issues and spoke at a rally outside the supreme court, he thinks an openly gay player will not be in nfl but major league baseball. joining me now is minnesota vikings punter chris kluwe. what do you make about what is happening at the court some. well, i think it is unfortunate that the supreme court is moving away from the idea of making a sweeping statement here, because they have a perfect chance to show american citizens who pay their taxes, serve in our military and who are being discriminated against are no longer discriminated against. it is interesting, they are coming down on marriage, military service, we don t really see it happening in major sports. actually, why do you think that ....
Windsor before the highest court in the land. edith windsor marry her wife in canada. when her wife died she was forced to pay $360,000 in inheritance tax, because the marriage was not recognized by doma. the obama administration refused to defend it. a lawyer for the white house speaking today, drawing tough questioning from six of the nine justices. well, is what happened in 1996, and i m going to quote from the house report here, is that congress decided to reflect and honor a collective moral judgment and express moral disapproval of homosexuality. is that what happened in 1996? what gives the federal government the right to be concerned that all at what the definition of marriage is? when it has 1,100 laws, which in our society means that the federal government is ....
Spouse is right here watching and listening and would be very proud and happy of where we ve come to. well today s case came just a day after oral arguments on california s proposition 8, california s same-sex marriage ban. justices both liberal and conservative, seemed reluctant yesterday to use it as a basis for sweeping national change. this case, doma, could be just the opposite. senior analyst jeffrey toobin joins us, he was inside the court. i know everything comes from the caveat that the supreme court could surprise us, but you think that doma is in trouble, the majority of justices are inclined to throw it out. why do you say that? because of what justice kennedy said, the four democratic nominees to the supreme court were all very clearly hostile to the defense of marriage act, and so where were they going to get the fifth vote? well, anthony kennedy is the only real likely possibility, but repeatedly during the oral arguments today, he expressed what appeared to be his v ....
That the defense of marriage act violated state s rights. he did not talk about that it violated the rights of gay people. he said that it it violates the state s ability to regulate and create the laws of marriage. and he said it over and over again. and that is a winning argument for the defense of marriage act critics of edith windsor and company. well, chief justice john roberts was critical of how president obama was handling doma, they re not defending the law in court but still enforcing it. here is part of what the chief justice said, i want to play that. i don t see why he doesn t have the courage of his convictions and execute not only the statute, but do it consistent with his view of the constitution, rather than saying oh, well, we ll wait until the supreme court says we ll have no choice. tough words there, question whether the president has the courage of his convictions. ....