The more I read it, the more I realize that Vaughn Walker is a freaking genius

[scheming daemons]

His decision is worded in such a way as to make it almost impossible for it to be overturned.

I would have to say this is one of the most ironclad judicial decisions ever made on by a lower court.


Justice Kennedy has been placed in a box... a box that he will have a very hard time escaping when Prop 8 comes before the SCOTUS.


Actually... the way this decision was written, it will be very hard for any group to be able to show grounds for appealing this up to the SCOTUS in the first place.




Judge Vaughn Walker. The dude is my new freaking hero.

[Pirate Smile]

1. I love him.

:)

[tridim]

2. But he's gay, so he just can't be trusted to make logical and fair decisions!

I really hope the sarcasm tag isn't necessary.

He is a true American hero, in a time when the word "hero" is applied far too often.

[jobycom]

7. yeah, he's illogical but has great taste in wallpaper.

:) Those stereotypes drive me crazy, too.

[zipplewrath]

3. The good and the bad

It doesn't appear that anyone with standing particularly wants to appeal. That'll be good for California, but not so hot for the rest of the country. It'll never get to the USSC that way. I'm worried a bit that the way it WILL get to the USSC is by appealing the "standing" issue. Some group will appeal that, saying they should be allowed to appeal. The USSC will agree with them. Then they'll form the argument that the USSC can use to overturn the decision.

[metapunditedgy]

10. I think the RW crazies want an appeal. So the next thing to look for is

RW commentators finding a way to blame the left for their inability to appeal. Then they can keep their base riled up forever.

[BattyDem]

4. He thought of everything.

Every time I think of something that the other side could use, I read the decision again and I say, "Oh wait, he covered that." :-)

[jobycom]

5. Yeah, it covers every base, doesn't it?

Every claim by the supporters was shot down in such a way that they had no opening to claim personal damage. He based every aspect of the decision on equality and equal protection, so any appeal will basically be arguing that they should be allowed to discriminate.

Basically he assumed marriage equality, and made every 8er claim into a request for special privileges. It's the kind of ruling the Supreme Court might just avoid taking up, because those who like the decision won't want it overturned, and those who don't like it might hope for a less ironclad decision to base their fight on.

And now that you mention it, he did seem to craft a lot of that just to fit Kennedy's profile, didn't he? Kennedy likes to be the center of attention, which is why his decisions are inconsistent, but he does like creative, logical decisions. Part of the reason he went to the Dark Side on Bush V Gore, i think, was that his ego loved the fact that he could grasp the Right's weird twisting of Equal Protection. It made him feel smarter than the rest to be able to grasp it, and he failed to step back and see if the whole thing made sense. This decision has the intriguing logic Kennedy likes, plus it gives him a powerful vote to radically alter history. It's exactly the way he and his ego votes.

Okay, you've convinced me. Judge Walker is genius. And he did admirable legal work on this one.

[daleanime]

6. Unfortunely...

people have shown time and again the ability to overcome reason and sense.:banghead:

[NJmaverick]

8. K & R!

[felix_numinous]

9. Maybe some people think this is a stretch

but I look at this ruling as being at the front lines of the current civil rights struggle. Judge Walker will go down in history well.

I will be celebrating my ass off this weekend!

[Ruby the Liberal]

11. There is another suit heading to SCOTUS on this. Out of Boston.

The suit is against the Federal government for not recognizing gay marriage for Federal income tax purposes.

Should be interesting.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

13. Full Faith & Credit clause will have to be invoked next.

in order for it to apply in all 50 states. That's in the U.S. Constitution.

In Loving v. Virginia, the plaintiffs got married in D.C. and then moved to Va. which had a law against interracial marriages, which would have invalidated their marriage. So they sued and got the law overturned as unconstitutional.

This is exactly equivalent.

When a straight couple gets married in one state and moves to another state, their marriage is not automatically invalidated.


However a gay couple that was legally married in Mass. moved to Texas, and a Dallas judge granted them a valid divorce, while the Texas A.G. Greg Abbott was sputtering about annulling the gay marriage.

[BootinUp]

12. From the coverage on it

I have deduced the same basically.