Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« Malaysia Puts the Kibosh on Pu... | Hot Homophobe of the Day »

Wednesday, August 9, 2006

Things That Make You Go Hmm…

Posted by on August 9 at 16:05 PM

The Washington State Supreme Court is giving the plaintiffs in the gay marriage case a little extra time to contemplate asking the court to reconsider their lame-brained decision. A good sign? Discuss.


CommentsRSS icon

Either a good sign or they realized if they didn't give sufficient time for decisions by those suing they would help it win on appeal for technical reasons, as well as elevate it higher, exposing some of the questionable logic behind their rulings on a national or regional stage.

That or they don't want Dan to make up nicknames for them.

Shari Alexander?

hmmm....

shouldn't they file an appeal thing even if its just symbolic, just to show that they're not going away? i wonder if that weasel jamie pederson will be against this before he becomes for it?

"The longer we have to think about it, the better off we are," said Lisa Stone, director of the Northwest Women's Law center. "We are analyzing every conceivable option, and nothing's off the table at this point."

It's refreshing to hear the lawyers keeping the public informed on or about their decision to file a motion to reconsider.

I'm all for filing that motion...Get on it!

I'm for it too—and we'll ask Pedersen about it tomorrow at the Stranger's second round of 43rd district endorsement interviews.

I've spoke to Jamie Pedersen and he knows this is important, AND symbolic. In fact, there are few people in this district who know that better than Jamie.

But remember folks, it's not just his decision. It's those plaintiffs too, who just might not want to be dragged through it all again to be turned down once more - even the possibility of such an outcome is scary, I'm sure.

i bet money this is how it goes:

if they make an appeal, pederson turns it into last-minute campaign fodder. if they don't appeal it, pederson takes the "i wanted to appeal but had to respect the plaintiffs decision" stance, for last minute campaign fodder.

isn't it funny, dan, how voters at the 43rd LD meeting last night didn't give a damn about two of your three finalists?
anyone at the stranger thinking better of the lame-brained final three?

What's your point, SA? Are we obligated to endorse—or come to the same conclusions—as the 43rd District org? Endorsements in this race are falling all over the place—it's one of the things that's making the race exciting, no?

Why wouldn't the plaintiffs want to do this? They were basically hand-picked anyway. They know the risks involved not matter how 'scary'.

One thing to consider: The opinion on the Supreme Court case wasn't just unjust, it was pretty weak and sloppy as far as opinions go, giving the legal community more options in the future (what those options are, who knows?) Going for a reconsideration could possibly give the Supreme Court an opportunity to tighten it up on the second try, leaving no room to maneuver later.

Don't EVEN try reading anything into this. It is pro forma - a party asks for a little time, it'll be granted because no one is disadvantaged.

At this point, logic has completely left the building.

The only way you can get the ruling you want is through appealing to bogus biases like they did. In this case, change it from an equal protection issue into a freedom of religion issue. Send some ministers up from gay friendly churches and have them say that the state is interfering with their freedom of religion by denying them the right to officiate their religious ceremonies (read: weddings) as they see fit.

I've done quite a few appeals in my time (well over 50), including several in the Washington Supreme Court. I've not had occasion to move for reconsideration of a S.Ct opinion but I've moved for reconsideration of a court of appeals decision. One very possible outcome is that the core of the decision will not change, but some of the ugly language on the periphery will be revised. For example, there could be some changes to make the decision less viciously harmful to gays and their families, even though the decision overall still upholds the DOMA.

It's hard to speculate; what the court could do will depend on what the plaintiffs ask for in their petition for reconsideration, and of course the court likely will be affected by the reactions to its idiocy.

Just because the reasoning and logic used by the Supreme Court was unsound and illogical, don't expect them to change their minds and deal with reality.

That's like expecting the WH to get some brains.

They need to file for reconsideration. We only need to sway one more judge. I think we can do it, if we didn't push a little bit just a short time ago we'd end up w/ Dino Rossi as governor. I'm sure that if the decision went the other way the other side would have an outcry to have the decision reconsidered. This state needs to know that queers aren't going to let them fuck w/ us.

It's entirely possible that they realized basing their decision on such a spurious claim as that marriage exists for procreation is questionable, at best. Possibly the reams of mail from those of us in legally-sanctioned marriages who cannot, will not, or don't wish to breed, made an impact. Possibly the reams of mail from those who cannot enter into legally-sanctioned marriages who have bred and are quietly rearing their offspring, made an impact. Maybe the cranio-rectal inversion suffered by three of them (I expect no different from idiots like Jim Johnson or Richard Sanders) is starting to reverse itself.

Dammit, Barbara Madsen's own daughter works for LGBT causes!

The Slog moves very fast. I have a question regarding the following post Dan.

"we'll ask Pedersen about it tomorrow at the Stranger's second round of 43rd district endorsement interviews."

Posted by Dan Savage - August 9, 2006 04:46 PM

What did Pedersen have to say? Did you have a chance to talk to him?

Thanks for the update in advance.

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).