if there weren t something wrong, then why wouldn t we be allowed to get married? that was the question olson and boies wanted answered. they took on perry and stier and another couple as clintds. and they won in california against proposition 8, and now the case is always where they suspected it would end up, in supreme court. their argument is simple. same-sex marriage is a constitutional right, period. no matter how many states have voted to ban it. the reason we have the constitution, the reason we have a bill of rights is there are certain rights that are so fundamental to everybody that we say no majority can take it away. the attorneys arguing the other side read the constitution differently. there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage in the u.s. constitution. austin nimocks is defending
wrong, then why wouldn t we be allowed to get married? that was the question olson and boies wanted answered. they took on perry and stier and another couple as clients. and they won in california against proposition 8, and now the case is always where they suspected it would end up, in supreme court. their argument is simple. same-sex marriage is a constitutional right, period. no matter how many states have voted to ban it. the reason we have the constitution, the reason we have a bill of rights is there are certain rights that are so fundamental to everybody that we say no majority can take it away. the attorneys arguing the other side read the constitution differently. there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage in the u.s. constitution. austin nimocks is part of the legal team defending proposition 8.
wrong, then why wouldn t we be allowed to get married? that was the question olson and boies wanted answered. they took on perry and stier and another couple as clients. and they won in california against proposition 8, and now the case is always where they suspected it would end up, in supreme court. their argument is simple. same-sex marriage is a constitutional right, period. no matter how many states have voted to ban it. the reason we have the constitution, the reason we have a bill of rights is there are certain rights that are so fundamental to everybody that we say no majority can take it away. the attorneys arguing the other side read the constitution differently. there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage in the u.s. constitution. austin nimocks is part of the
supreme court. it s been a long journey here for the last 3 1/2 years. now it s up to the nine justices to make a decision. the court has several ways to decide this case from a very broad-sweeping conclusion with respect to the rights of our citizens in this country, to a narrower ruling that would be limited basically to california. opposing attorney austin nimocks agreed the court was conflicted and the outcome uncertain. can you tell at all from the questions you were getting about the way in which the justices were thinking about this case? you can tell a lot about how they re thinking about it. what you can t tell is how they may decide the case. it will be months until the court announces a decision. this could be a step along the way or it could be the end of the line in terms of vindicating the rights of gay and lesbian citizens in this country.
to everybody that we say no majority can take it away. the attorneys arguing the other side read the constitution differently. there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage in the u.s. constitution. austin nimocks is defending proposition 8. would you have to say that marriage laws and marriage from the very beginning of civilization only existed to discriminate against gays and lesbians, and we know that s not the case. he says it s not a matter of discrimination but rather of definition and marriage is defined between a man and woman for one main reason. we have marriage laws because we have children. and marriage laws attach men and women to each other and legally to the children that they bring forth. so do you think the olson boys case is pure overreach? ultimately the sovereignty in