It seemed time to check who’s commenting on today’s historic Supreme Court decision on gay marriage, and who isn’t.

  • I quoted Huckabee below telling us that “Jesus wept.”
  • Nothing from Sarah Palin.
  • Nothing from Sean Hannity.
  • John Boehner is “disappointed” in a rather weak statement for the GOP Speaker of the House.
  • RNC home page – nuttin honey: rnc-doma
  • The officially-designated hate group Family Research Council tries to claim victory. Heh. 'frc-doma
  • Another officially-designated hate group, American Family Association, flips out: AFA-flip-out

Huge news – immigration judge stops deportation of gay Colombian man because of Supreme Court striking down DOMA.

deportations-stopped-2 immigration-stopped


President Obama’s issues statement on Supreme Court striking down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and in essence making gay marriage legal again in California:

Office of the Press Secretary
June 26, 2013

Statement by the President on the Supreme Court Ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act

I applaud the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act. This was discrimination enshrined in law. It treated loving, committed gay and lesbian couples as a separate and lesser class of people. The Supreme Court has righted that wrong, and our country is better off for it. We are a people who declared that we are all created equal – and the love we commit to one another must be equal as well.

This ruling is a victory for couples who have long fought for equal treatment under the law; for children whose parents’ marriages will now be recognized, rightly, as legitimate; for families that, at long last, will get the respect and protection they deserve; and for friends and supporters who have wanted nothing more than to see their loved ones treated fairly and have worked hard to persuade their nation to change for the better.

So we welcome today’s decision, and I’ve directed the Attorney General to work with other members of my Cabinet to review all relevant federal statutes to ensure this decision, including its implications for Federal benefits and obligations, is implemented swiftly and smoothly.

On an issue as sensitive as this, knowing that Americans hold a wide range of views based on deeply held beliefs, maintaining our nation’s commitment to religious freedom is also vital. How religious institutions define and consecrate marriage has always been up to those institutions. Nothing about this decision – which applies only to civil marriages – changes that.

The laws of our land are catching up to the fundamental truth that millions of Americans hold in our hearts: when all Americans are treated as equal, no matter who they are or whom they love, we are all more free.


I had to share former GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee’s tweets about today’s Supreme Court decisions on Prop 8 and DOMA.  Priceless:


Jesus wept when you were born. Could you be a bigger drama queen?

Best response to Huckabee:



Here’s Edie Windsor’s statement – sadly the NewsHour is refusing to make the video embeddable, and Youtube is hiccuping yet again (that site just doesn’t work anymore).


And a big thank you to Ronald Reagan for appointing Justice Kennedy and giving us gay marriage (well, at least recognized at the federal level). Heh.

The video below is 18 of the most touching seconds ever seen on television.

Courtesy of MSNBC, here are two of the Prop 8 plaintiffs,  Jeff Zarillo and Paul Katami (speaking), outside the Supreme Court moments ago.  Paul propose to Jeff, on camera, in front of millions:

When can gays in California get married? From Lambda Legal’s Jon Davidson:

Same-sex couples will not be able to marry, in California, I believe, until after the Ninth Circuit lifts its stay of Judge Walker’s injunction. The Supreme Court’s decision in Hollingsworth v. Perry will not be final for 25 more days (until after the time for a petition for rehearing has expired), and, after that happens, the Supreme Court will issue its mandate (order) sending the case back to the Ninth Circuit, which then has to issue its mandate sending the case back to the District Court. I believe the state will only then be allowing same-sex couples to marry. I assume state officials will be sending clarification about all this soon.

And here’s Scotusblog’s take on whether they can marry in California:

“There will be much further discussion and analysis about how the decision in Perry affects other couples in California. For the time being, we will say this: the Supreme Court has dismissed the appeal challenging a final order from the trial court. It would appear, then, that the order will go into effect. And it appears that this final order purports to prohibit the Attorney General and the Governor from enforcing Prop. 8. There could well be new challenges to the scope of that order. But for the time being, the order appears to be in effect and to prevent enforcement of Proposition 8 statewide.”

Prop 8 plaintiffs take call from President Obama, aboard Air Force One, offering his congratulations. We shouldn’t forget that the President came around for us and helped immensely on this.  It didn’t hurt that he stopped defending DOMA, and it certainly didn’t hurt that he came out for marriage equality.  Yeah, it took a while. It often does on our issues with everyone. :)  But as someone once said, if we want people to support us, we shouldn’t criticize them once they do.


The moment DOMA plaintiff Edie Windsor got the news, and a photo of her on the phone with President Obama following her magnificent victory:

“Hello, who am I talking to?” Windsor said. “Oh, Barack Obama? I wanted to thank you. I think your coming out for us made such a difference throughout the country.”

“A third of Americans now live in a state where gay people share in the freedom to marry.” – Evan Wolfson

Supreme Court decides it can’t rule on Prop 8, didn’t have standing. That means, however, that Prop 8 is struck down, as the earlier court struck it down, and gay marriage is now legal again in California.

Prop 8 lawyer David Boies with two of the gay plaintiffs in the case.

Prop 8 lawyer David Boies with two of the gay plaintiffs in the case.

Chris Geidner’s profile of DOMA victor Edie Windsor.

And here’s the text of the Prop 8 decision:




From the end of Kennedy’s majority decision:

The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity. 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.

CNN’s Tapper: “This is going to mean real things to real people.”

CNN’s Toobin: “DOMA is gone. This is a major, broadly written decision.”

CNN’s Jonathan Turley: “Breathtaking decision. Kennedy went way beyond where he had to go…. Kennedy goes out of his way to say this about the dignity of marriage.”

Supreme Court strikes down the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act as unconstitutional.

Page 4 of hte Roberts dissent, talking about Prop 8: “We hold today that we lack jurisdiction to consider it in the particular context of Hollingsworth v. Perry.”

The Alito dissent: “Whether the [BLAG] has standing to address the petition is a much more difficult question.”

There is language suggesting that the Court will dismiss Prop 8 on standing.

Justice Scalia is reading from his dissent right now. The Court’s opinion both in explaining its jurisdiction and its decision “both spring from the same diseased root: an exalted notion of the role of this court in American democratic society.”

The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity. By seeking to displace this protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others.

There is a “careful consideration” standard: In determining whether a law is motivated by improper animus or purpose, discriminations of an unusual character especially require careful consideration. DOMA cannot survive under these principles.

“DOMA singles out a class of persons deemed by a State entitled ot recognition and protection to enhance their own liberty.”

“DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment.” – SCOTUSBLOG

Who sides where:

KENNEDY, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which GINSBURG, BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined. ROBERTS, C. J., filed a dissenting opinion. SCALIA, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which THOMAS, J., joined, and in which ROBERTS, C. J., joined as to Part I. ALITO, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which THOMAS, J., joined as to Parts II and III.

Here’s the full opinion on DOMA:

Us v Windsor

We’ll be live-blogging the Supreme Court decisions on the DOMA and Prop 8 gay marriage cases as they come in in a few moments.  Judging by my Twitter feed, it’s quite the scene this morning at the Supreme Court.  Here are a few tweets:





Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Instagram | Google+ | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. .

Share This Post

© 2019 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS