Page 6 - Upper Case News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

Unconstitutional? >> it was constitutional when we -- as a culture determined that sexual orientation is a characteristic of individuals that they cannot control. >> i see. when did that happen? >> there is no specific date and time. >> how am i supposed to know how to decide a case when you can't give me a date when the constitution changed? >> this seems to be a bit of a brilliant sort of scalia judicialujitsu, he is trying to undermine the argument the constitutionality of gay marriage, as no one ever questioned that. >> i thought it was an unconvincing effort of hamlin on the potomac. angs...

By most standards, pedro quezada was already living the american dream. in the 1980s, he left the dominican republic and came to the united states to find work. he eventually settled in new jersey where he and his wife inez raised their five children. he opened his own bodega, often putting in 18-hour days. a fire restored must of the bodega three years ago, and on saturday he found himself with the winning $338 million powerball ticket. the fourth largest jackpot in powerball history. if quezada's life, his own version of the american dream had been written slowly, pain stakingly and quietly,...

Fundamental questions in their mind, even kennedy. kennedy said the trend toward equality may reach a magnificent end or go over a cliff. that's a chill statement it gave insight that even kennedy isn't too clear. >> scalia seems to have had more of an antigay rights agenda on decision making on the court. i want to play a little exchange between him and ted olson, talking about whether or not gay marriage has been deemed unconstitutional. let's take a listen to that. >> when did it become unconstitutional to prohibit gays from marrying? >> they did not assign a date to it, justice scalia. as ...

We had a case in california that decided that marriage -- interracial marriage, much earlier than the rest of the country. let me say also to this point about where california is, you know, four years prior to prop 8, there was an initiative on the california ballot that didn't change the constitution, it changed the statute and made a definition of marriage. the vote in california was i think in the 60% -- over 60% of californians voted in that initiative to define marriage in a man and a woman and four years later that margin whittled down to a little over two percentage points. i believe a ...

Addicting hundreds of years of juris prudence, we only involve in one direction, toward greater equality and greater in collusion, the acknowledgment to loving vs. virginia, is right on point. the supreme court managed to come back to the reinvague ration of principles of equal justice under law and due process and open the door a little wider. we were debating marriage equality in new york. there were a lot of arguments about its effect on religious institutions it it doesn't create problems for religious institutions or opposite sex marriages. they were down to this argument that the state h...