It's interesting that SCOTUS announced the DOMA ruling prior to the Prop 8 ruling.

[pinto]

The broad decision on the unconstitutionality of DOMA and the lack of standing ruling on Prop 8 sends it back to CA. I expect CA will go for it (equal marriage rights) in light of the DOMA ruling.

[rurallib]

1. from what I understand from SCOTUSblog the order of the announcements

is based on the seniority of the justice writing for the court. The Chief Justice by virtue of his position is always most senior no matter how long he has been there. He is also the one deciding who writes the opinion.

In today's instance Kennedy wrote DOMA and Roberts wrote Prop 8. But of course Roberts determined that DOMA would go first based on his selection of Kennedy for one and himself for the other.

[pinto]

2. Ah, got it.

Thanks.

[jberryhill]

3. The DOMA ruling has no impact on the state question

"The class to which DOMA directs its restrictions and restraints are those persons who are joined in same-sex marriages made lawful by the State.
[...]
By seeking to displace this protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others,the federal statute is in violation of the Fifth Amendment. This opinion and its holding are confined to those lawful marriages."

In other words, the ruling says that if a state recognizes same sex marriage, then the federal government cannot second-guess that state law status. The decision is not prescriptive as to whether states should, or should not, deem any class of persons eligible to marry.

[pinto]

5. Yeah, I know. I guess what struck me, as a Californian, was the conceptual impact.

Brown and Harris support equal marriage rights and the Prop 8 ruling says a private party has no standing to challenge the 9th District's decision.

[Warpy]

4. DOMA from the beginning was unconstitutional

and only blinkered, pig ignorant men like Scalia who want to govern by the bible wouldn't admit it. I'm not a bit surprised it was overturned. Now Republicans have another thing to waste time on besides another attempt to overturn the ACA.

I was a little surprised they'd agreed to hear Prop 8. I've always thought they'd punt it right back to California, loath to issue a ruling on the level of Loving vs. VA to get constitutional protections enacted nation wide.

[jberryhill]

6. It was a safety valve to avoid a constitutional amendment

I'm surprised Section 3 lasted this long, though.