O'Reilly got particularly angry when talking with Fox News analyst Juan Williams, calling Chief Justice John Roberts' opinion that the backers of Proposition 8 had no standing to appeal the case "just absurd."

Williams argued that in cases like Prop 8 and Obamacare, Roberts "made a decision based on what he thought was in the political best interest of the Court."

"That's not his job!" O'Reilly exploded. "That's not his job, Juan!"

Here's the video. The interview with Williams begins at around 4:25:

Continue Reading...

The case involves a lesbian couple that wants to adopt three children, but is barred from it under both a state constitutional amendment and a state statute. As Marty Lederman at SCOTUSblog explains, the constitutional amendment, "enacted in 2004, provides that '[t]o secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children, the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose.'" The state statute limits adoption to single people or married couples. Thus since they are not considered married under state law, the couple cannot adopt.

Continue Reading...

"President Obama directed federal departments to ensure the decision and its implication for federal benefits for same-sex legally married couples are implemented swiftly and smoothly," Napolitano said in a statement on Monday.  "To that end, effective immediately, I have directed U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to review immigration visa petitions filed on behalf of a same-sex spouse in the same manner as those filed on behalf of an opposite-sex spouse.”

Continue Reading...

The bill, called the Federal Marriage Amendment, is quite short:

Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.

Last week, the Supreme Court held that Section 3 of DOMA, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman for the purposes of receiving federal benefits, is unconstitutional.

Though there's no chance that Huelskamp's legislation will become law, 28 Republicans have signed on as co-sponsors to it, mostly unsurprising conservatives like Paul Broun, Ga., Trent Franks, Ariz., Louie Gohmert, Texas, Ralph Hall, Texas, Jim Jordan, Ohio, and Steve Stockman, Texas.

The Huffington Post reports:

Continue Reading...

“We are manufacturing the right to redefine marriage,” Eastman said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” He added: “That’s judicial tyranny, not the kind of system we have.”

Watch, via Mediaite:

Continue Reading...

I went to the rally, camera in hand, expecting to see the joyous faces of those who had been so worried while the SCOTUS decisions were being awaited. What I saw and heard was not a photo op: men and women, cautiously joyful, wandering through occasional bursts of enthusiasm. There was introspection, wonder, maybe even shell-shock. I went to the rally with a need for solidarity, feeling relief more than anything but the mood at the New York “victory” rally was like the tenuous ripples of a child stepping into a still lake. The water feels good, but what lies beneath? Was it trepidation or the cynicism often attributed to New Yorkers? Realism or pessimism?

Continue Reading...

"As my LGBT fans and friends always said to me, 'I knew Laday Gaga when,'" Gaga said. "Well, look who the star is now. Now I get to say that I knew you when. Now I get to say that I knew you when you suffered, when you felt unequal, when you felt there was nothing to look forward to."

Waving a rainbow flag, Gaga then sand the national anthem:

Continue Reading...

"Once you move marriage beyond the scope of a man and a woman, you really don't end up with a good place to put a limit," Gohmert, R-Texas, said, adding: "I think polygamy is wrong, bigamy is wrong, and it's a crime in many places -- but how will that be justifiable now that the court has removed this? There's some [who] believe polygamy is a way to go."

h/t the Huffington Post.

Continue Reading...

Speaking on the conservative radio show The Steve Deace Show, Huelskamp, a Republican from Kansas, accused the Court of trying to “rewrite the Constitution” and “ramming their views down the throats of Americans.”

“If you read these decisions together," he continued, referring to both the Prop 8 and DOMA decisions (with majority opinions written by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy, respectively), "[it's] twisted logic, tortured the Constitution, I can’t even stand to read the decisions because I don’t even think they’d pass law school with decisions like that.”

Huelskamp is currently pushing the Federal Marriage Amendment, a constitutional amendment that would restore the effects of DOMA by defining marriage as between a man and a woman. In a 5-4 decision on Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled that the section of DOMA that did the same is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Continue Reading...

Michigan Live reports:

The decision from U.S. District Judge David S. Lawson grants an injunction which prevents Gov. Rick Snyder and state officials from enforcing the 2011 law prohibiting cities, counties and other public employers from offering benefits to same-sex domestic partners.

A group of five same-sex couples had filed suit against Snyder and the state alleging the law violated the U.S. Constitution by violating due process and equal protection rights. Attorneys for the state had argued the couples lacked standing to bring the suit and had not suffered an identifiable injury as a result of the law.

"It is hard to argue with a straight face that the primary purpose -- indeed, perhaps the sole purpose -- of the statute is other than to deny health benefits to the same-sex partners of public employees," Lawson said, the Associated Press reports. "But that can never be a legitimate governmental purpose."

Continue Reading...

Popular poultry purveyor Chick-fil-A has a long and well documented history of support for "traditional," man-lady marriage. But after Wednesday's Supreme Court rulings, the company's president, Dan Cathy, couldn't resist sharing his observation, via Twitter, that it was a "Sad day for our nation, founding fathers would be ashamed of our generation to abandon wisdom of the ages re: cornerstone of strong societies." Yes, I am totally sure that self-described cougar chaser Ben Franklin, along with Thomas Jefferson, a man who likely fathered six children with his slave, would be appalled. Cathy quickly deleted the tweet, and issued a corporate statement that he "realized his views didn't necessarily represent the views of all customers, restaurant owners and employees and didn't want to distract them from providing a great restaurant experience." In other words, oops, he forgot that thoughts go on the inside, and that conflating "shame" and civil rights can be bad for business.

Continue Reading...

But when speaking to a more conservative audience in an interview with Glenn Beck, Paul warned that changing marriage laws could lead to bestiality: “It is difficult, because if we have no laws on this, people will take it to one extension further -- does it have to be humans?”

Continue Reading...

There's this take, which strips away any subtext -- just two friends on a couch watching "Seinfeld":

Continue Reading...

Lambda Legal is planning to file a motion, in a case currently before the New Jersey Superior Court, that argues that current New Jersey law is at odds with the state Supreme Court's 2006 holding that gay couples are required to get the same benefits as straight couples.

From The Washington Post:

In response to the 2006 ruling, the legislature passed a bill establishing civil unions in the state. Since civil unions were adopted in the state, marriage advocates have argued that they are not equal to marriage. The DOMA ruling bolsters that claim. While couples in civil unions may get some federal benefits after the ruling — it’s a legal gray area — they will not get the automatic benefits enjoyed by spouses in states where gay marriage is legal.

Continue Reading...

The campaign, which is now all over the LGBT blogosphere, encourages the faithful to get "on our knees for America" and the logo, as AmericaBlog puts it "appears to be a man performing oral sex."

Continue Reading...

USA Today isn't exactly a bastion of profound insight – it's best known as the newspaper you find outside your hotel room door in the morning. But it still deserves a very special shout-out for condescending, heterosplaining crap anyway. In the story, Sharon Jayson says that "Just because same-sex couples can legally marry doesn't mean they will" and that "marriage isn't for everyone." Whoa whoa whoa SLOW DOWN, USA Today. The Supreme Court didn't just make marriage mandatory for every homosexual in America? Jayson goes on to quote a University of Minnesota researcher who observes, "Some gays and lesbians clearly want to get married, but others are unsure or reject marriage for themselves." I feel a "The more you know" rainbow coming on here.

Continue Reading...

The magazine found artist Jack Hunter's image, titled "Moment of Joy," on Tumblr. Hunter said, “It’s amazing to witness how attitudes on gay rights have evolved in my lifetime."

“This is great for our kids, a moment we can all celebrate.”

Continue Reading...

WHYY-FM reports that Sims, who is the state's first openly gay lawmaker, was prevented from speaking about the decision to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act via a procedural move. "I wasn't planning on chastising anybody. I wasn't planning on discussing how far we have to come in Pennsylvania or that we really have no civil rights in Pennsylvania," Sims said. "It was really just going to limit my comments to how important the cases were."

Continue Reading...

Continue Reading...

The host of "The 700 Club" was speaking to Jay Sekulow, an attorney for the conservative American Center for Law and Justice. “I have no idea,” Sekulow replied. “I think what Justice Kennedy did, if you look at a series of cases that he’s been involved in, he’s taken the view that sexual orientation is a special class.”

Robertson later continued that the decision to overturn DOMA could pave the way for a Sodom and Gomorrah-type situation. “Look what happened to Sodom. After a while, there wasn’t any other way, and God did something pretty drastic.”

Watch, via MediaMatters:

Continue Reading...