The 2012-2013 Supreme Court term is shaping up to be a monumental one for LGBT equality. Christopher Stoll, senior staff attorney at the National Center for Lesbian Rights, has an article up at the Huffington Post that provides a valuable overview of the cases currently before the high court, the process by which the court decides which cases to accept for review, and the possible outcomes.
It’s a must-read, especially because the number of LGBT-related cases currently up for consideration by the Supreme Court is the largest the court has ever faced in any single term. Oh, and by the way, that term begins today.
Here’s an excerpt from Stoll’s article:
The cases on the Court’s fall docket have the potential to become watershed moments in the history of the LGBT movement.
Depending on what the justices do over the next several weeks, marriage equality may soon be restored in California, the Court may be on its way to striking down a destructive and discriminatory law that denies federal benefits to every married same-sex couple in America, and an important precedent about same-sex domestic partners could be set.
For Stoll’s informative breakdown of what to expect from the Supreme Court this term, head over to the Huffington Post and read his full article here.
To be precise, none of the appeals before the Supreme Court concern transsexual or transgender persons.
The Supreme Court released a list of the appeals that it has agreed to hear before next summer (which is referred to as granting certiorari).
It doesn’t include any of the cases that LGBT activists were watching.
With respect to the Proposition 8 appeal, the Brewer v Diaz appeal and the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) appeal, that probably means the court will announce on Monday October 1 that it will not hear those appeals.
If so, that would mean that same-sex couples wil again be able to marry in California, and that NOM may have to disclose the donors to its anti-gay campaigns in Maine.
It would also mean that the Diaz appeal in the Court of Appeal will continue; that appeal was still in progress even as the case was being considered by the Supreme Court.
With respect to the Windsor DOMA case, which was also considered by the court yesterday, I expect that the omission of that case from the latest list means either that the court will announce on Oct. 1 that it has agreed to hear that appeal, or that it has postponed a decision on that case until it can also consider three other DOMA cases that are in the pipeline, but were not considered yesterday. (There’s a chance that the Prop 8 appeal was similarly postponed, though that seems less likely.)
http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/092512zr5bc9.pdf
http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/ordersofthecourt.aspx
@F Young
I know it does sadden me that no transgender cases have been brought up yet to even a circuit court. I hope more people will continue to fight and bring the cases forward sooner rather than later. As for the four cases for same sex marriage. I am worried to death that they will not hear any of them, especially prop 8. Why, you might ask, when it comes to prop 8? Because where I live my significant other and I will never see marriage equality within 20 years unless the supreme court steps in and abolishes all amendments banning our right to marry. Prop 8 gives a slight chance of this happening if it is argued at the SCOTUS. For more broader information, Michigan still has the anti-gay sodomy law on the books and has refused to remove it, despite it being unconstitutional now after the Lawrence v. Texas case.
@Chris
I wouldn’t be overly worried about the Supreme Court not taking any of the appeals. They probably will take at least one DOMA case, but even if they didn’t, it could mean they think they’re not ready as a court or the cases are not strong enough, in which case it’s probably best they don’t hear these appeals.
Assuming Obama is re-elected and the Democrats retain control of the Senate, which are both likely, the Supreme Court will eventually be in a better position to overturn DOMA. In the meantime, Proposition 8 is good enough.
When you should worry is if it looks like Obama won’t be re-elected or the Democrats won’t get at least 50 seats in the Senate, because that could lead to serious long-term problems in the courts.
[...] If you’ve seen the Religious Liberty Quiz already, ignore this post and hold tight, because I’ll be serving up more content shortly. However, if you’ve not yet seen it, you simply must. In fact, even those who’ve already seen it might find it worth re-reading, because the right wingers are sure to continue shrieking about so-called attacks on religious liberty, especially with marriage on the ballot in four states in November and the Supreme Court almost certain to hear challenges to DOMA and/or Proposition 8 this term. [...]
F Young,
I have observed that if the Supreme Court had never struck down a substantially similar law, it will review a lower court decision that struck down a law, whether or not there is a circuit split. It did this twice in a gay rights context. See Board of Education v. National Gay Task Force, 470 U.S. 159 (1985), Romer v. Evans , 517 U.S. 620 (1996). It did this numerous times in other contexts. See Reitman v. Mulkey, 387 U.S. 369 (1967), Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (1997)
Also, if the Supreme Court denies cert to bioth Hollingsworth and Brewer, Arizona will lose the Brewer case.
[...] tipping his hand about how he’s likely to vote on any of the LGBT-related cases that are poised to be reviewed by the high court: “The death penalty? Give me a break. It’s easy. Abortion? Absolutely [...]