Well, i think the court by citing loving in windsor thinks that there is not much difference between marriage by a samesex couple and marriage by an interracial couple. They didnt decide the case but they cited it. The trend is certainly in that direction. I think the court its different from saying what loving stands for. Isnt the answer to my question about what happened in 1968 pretty obvious because we have baker in 1973. I think that lawrence, excuse me, that Justice Kennedy tells us something about how the court may be viewing these cases. I think what he is saying and i think you see it in lawrence and you see it in windsor. The court is saying that back decades ago, certain practices were accepted. Now we understand more about these things and we now understand that these are now going to be framed as discriminatory. We didnt know anything about samesex couples back at the at the time of loving. These were hiding because their conduct was criminalized. I think to say that this
We need each other and you see the nextgeneration playing this out every day in terms of their choices, where they live, coming back to cities. The third emerging trends is this an oftentimes is emanating from cities and counties. In this case a senior Governors Office and its a new way of leadership. Its that new wave has been embraced by men and women who are solving problems in cities across american its not about ideology. Its about solving problems. Its not about bureaucracy. Its about doing the things that work. Its not about a chain of command, its about ever widening circles of collaboration, inviting more people to be a part of solving our problems together. Thats not only the New Hampshire way, thats the maryland way and thats the american way. We are the greatest problemsolving people ever brought forward on the face of our planet. So you have 38 days to govern until election day. Are you ready . Lets all join hands and contact the voting, shall we . The good news is that me
I am not a member of the nsa team and i do not apologize for that to anyone. Thank you for your time and i look forward to the question and answer. Over the next few hours or cspan 3, well look at federal cases in the National Supreme court. Up next, oral arguments from a lawsuit transmissioning michigans bang ban on gay marriages. After that, oral argument and American Civil Liberties union versus clapper on the National Security agencys collection of americans phone records. And the conversation on cameras and the court, and other issues of Supreme Court transparency, and later, a discussion on judicial independence. On monday, the Supreme Court decided not the hear michigan was not among those states so its ban on samesex marriage was not affected. Up next on cspan 3, the oral argument on michigans ban on gay marriage. Whether a District Court can disregard a directly namely baker versus nelson, and the bigger picture, its about what federal rights in the creation of a new federal c
May it please the court. For 50 years the Supreme Court has recognize that the freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life are libertied protected by due process. April and jane have a constitutional right to share a life, to marry, to form a family, to raise their children. We show in this case that no matter what standard of scrutiny the court uses, no matter what doctrine the court applies, the state cant prevail here. The michigan marriage amendment is unconstitutional. A starting disagreement between the parties as the court has already observed, is an articulation of the right itself, its the right to marry i realize before windsor, the first and Second Circuit said that baker is binding, post wind sorry, theres no majority recognizing that, i have to say, i find that a very serious issue, the thing thats coming on is you, oddly enough, we treat some reversals as binding precedent no less than a fully written opinion. Everyone understands thats true, theres
I am not a member of the nsa team and i do not apologize for that to anyone. Thank you for your time and i look forward to the question and answer. Over the next few hours or cspan 3, well look at federal cases in the National Supreme court. Up next, oral arguments from a lawsuit transmissioning michigans bang ban on gay marriages. After that, oral argument and American Civil Liberties union versus clapper on the National Security agencys collection of americans phone records. And the conversation on cameras and the court, and other issues of Supreme Court transparency, and later, a discussion on judicial independence. On monday, the Supreme Court decided not the hear michigan was not among those states so its ban on samesex marriage was not affected. Up next on cspan 3, the oral argument on michigans ban on gay marriage. Whether a District Court can disregard a directly namely baker versus nelson, and the bigger picture, its about what federal rights in the creation of a new federal c