Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
Wed Jun 26, 2013, 11:00 AM Jun 2013

In a Nutshell...

Briefly, this is what today's decisions in Windsor and Perry mean for the country...

The SCOTUS punted in Perry (Prop 8), much to the dismay of Kennedy and the other dissenters because of its ruling on the level of review in Windsor (DOMA). Basically, the majority, led by Kennedy, in Windsor has decided that any federal governmental discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation will be held to 'strict scrutiny' review. This means that the state may only enact laws (that will be upheld) if they can justify their actions by showing the law is the least intrusive way to forward a legitimate government need. This is why Scalia was so angry with the decision; his dissent held that the standard of review should be 'rational basis' which would have meant the onus would have been on a plaintiff to show that the government had absolutely no rational for passing a discriminatory law. For all practical purposes, there is very little difference between 'rational basis' review and the 'arbitrary or capricious' standard.

This is why Scalia and others held that the plaintiff in Perry had no standing to challenge Prop 8. If Perry had been able to get past standing then the Court would have had to rule against the plaintiff as the new standard for review is 'strict scrutiny.' While obviously I haven't had a chance to read the entirety of both rulings, this will likely explain the very unusual split in the Court.

So, the SCOTUS punted but they also changed the entire dynamic of discrimination of the LGBT community at the federal level. Of course, the states will still be free to enact 'traditional marriage' laws for now but these rulings will now make it extremely difficult for these states when challenged under the 14th Amendment which expands certain Constitutional protections to the people at the state level. Even if a state chooses to support a discriminatory law, it will need to show that it has no other option but to do so and that the law benefits the majority more than it harms the minority. It will be hard to turn the clock back on LGBT rights after today.

In a nutshell, we won.

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
In a Nutshell... (Original Post) last1standing Jun 2013 OP
Agree. Good synopsis. pinto Jun 2013 #1
But probably too long and dry for most. last1standing Jun 2013 #2

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
2. But probably too long and dry for most.
Wed Jun 26, 2013, 11:22 AM
Jun 2013

I should have insulted somebody in the title. That would have gotten more reads.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»In a Nutshell...