"Making matters worse, if Trump is elected this year he could veto any congressional attempt to reverse such a disastrous ruling of the Court by passing a law guaranteeing same sex marriage rights."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Themadbeagle@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

If you read the article it does not mean states will have to issue licenses to same sex couples in their own state, just, from my understanding, honor ones issued in states where it is legal (which while Obergefell stands is all of them). It is also important to note that the Supreme Court had the power to overturn legislation if it deems it unconditional, so, while it would be hard for them to outright overturn this bill using the constitution, since a state cannot hold religious preference due to seperation of church and state, it cannot be ruled out entirely. I feel it is likely they rule in favor of an individual, such as a county clerk, not having to issue a marriage license if it "goes against their religious beliefs", which could basically mean a ban for large areas of some states with highly religious conservatives.

[–] exocrinous@lemm.ee 8 points 8 months ago

I keep saying we gotta fight these laws through the power of malicious compliance.

Get a job as a clerk with the department of marriages. Say "I'm an atheist, and I don't believe in marriage as in my mind it has a religious character." Sue the state for 10 years salary for firing you.

It's the same as those Florida laws. Sue your kids' school for referring to your child with a gendered pronoun. Sue the library for stocking the Bible. Establish precedent that these laws go both ways. It's the same stuff the Satanic Temple has been doing for years.

[–] habitualcynic@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

Got it! Poor wording on my part, I was more thinking that the interstate guarantee was protected. It’s disgraceful that this “court” even exists and this even had to be a thing.