stats for wordpress

Are you on Facebook?

Would you please click "like" in the box to your right, or

Visit us on Facebook!

Post image for NOM: SCOTUS Took Prop 8 To Overturn ‘Rogue Ruling’ By ‘Homosexual Judge’

NOM: SCOTUS Took Prop 8 To Overturn ‘Rogue Ruling’ By ‘Homosexual Judge’

by David Badash on December 7, 2012

in Marriage,News

John Eastman, chairman of NOM, the National Organization For Marriage, today responded to the news the U.S. Supreme Court will hear California’s Prop 8 case by claiming the court wanted to hear the case to overturn “a trial presided over by a homosexual judge involved in a long-term same-sex relationship” and claimed the decision was “a strong signal that the justices are concerned with the rogue rulings that have come out of San Francisco.”

“We believe that it is significant that the Supreme Court has taken the Prop 8 case,” said John Eastman, via a statement. “We believe it is a strong signal that the Court will reverse the lower courts and uphold Proposition 8. That is the right outcome based on the law and based on the principle that voters hold the ultimate power over basic policy judgments and their decisions are entitled to respect.”

NOM was the largest contributor to qualifying Proposition 8 to the ballot and has been a major supporter of legal efforts to uphold it. The trial court in San Francisco—in a trial presided over by a homosexual judge involved in a long-term same-sex relationship—invalidated Prop 8, finding for the first time in American history a right to same-sex marriage under the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a decision written by Justice Stephen Reinhart, largely ignored the trial court’s reasoning and fashioned a ruling devoid of precedent, claiming that once a state has “approved” same-sex marriage, it cannot take it away. But California voters never approved gay marriage. Instead, a sharply divided state Supreme Court, in a 4-3 ruling, imposed gay marriage. Voters overruled it with the passage of Proposition 8 several months later.

“Had the Supreme Court agreed with the lower courts’ decisions invalidating Proposition 8, it could simply have declined to grant certiorari in the case,” Eastman said. “It’s a strong signal that the justices are concerned with the rogue rulings that have come out of San Francisco at both the trial court and appellate levels. It’s worth noting that Judge Reinhart is the most overruled judge in America. I think this case will add to his record.”

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...


We invite you to sign up for our new mailing list, and subscribe to The New Civil Rights Movement via email or RSS.

Also, please like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter!


No More Mythology December 7, 2012 at 4:46 pm

Actually, SCOTUS took this to hopefully put to rest the absurd crossing of church and state, and to validate what so many lower federal judges have held: that the Fourteenth Amendment requires marital equality under the law. Hopefully NOM will very soon have no more reason to exist, and those very same Neanderthals can go the way of their namesakes – into the dustbin of history.

Scott_Rose December 7, 2012 at 4:52 pm

NOM is propagandizing without acknowledging the many different possible outcomes of the Supreme Court's deliberations in Hollingsworth v. Perry. It's true that if the Court had not granted cert, marriage in California would have resumed immediately. However, the Supreme Court could now go beyond the narrow ruling in the case. What's more is that for the NOMzi John Eastman to tell his NOMzi followers that the judge in the case was a "homosexual" reeks of despicable bigotry. As if only heterosexuals who are against gay rights should ever be allowed to serve as judges on gay rights-related cases. And, as if no heterosexual judges had ever ruled against DOMA and similar anti-gay laws. Eastman and the NOMzis are filthy anti-gay bigots.

yourmuse December 7, 2012 at 4:54 pm

I wonder, do they accuse the heterosexual judges of having an agenda because of their long-term partnerships with people of the opposite sex? Methinks not.

weshlovrcm December 7, 2012 at 5:10 pm

The radical pro-homophobia lobby knows this is their Waterloo. If they lose, there goes the $$$. So they are spinning feverishly, because none of them want to get real jobs. It's so much easier promoting the evil anti-gay agenda and getting paid for reviling, ignoring Jesus' commandments and ripping gay families apart. What will they do when Prop. 8 loses considering that they are putting all their eggs in this one basket? Will we see angry, greedy anti-gay activist Brown crying again as we did in that photo after marriage equality won in New York?

kwine333 December 8, 2012 at 1:21 am

One thing that wasn't said about the irrelevant ramblings of NOM is the fact that no one fighting for Prop 8 in court could come up with any hard evidence as to why Gays and Lesbians getting married is such a bad thing. NOM sees the writing on the wall. They have lost. They are one note. If SCOTUS votes DOMA and Prop 8 down, NOM will either disappear or have to find another group to hate and torment.

DarthEVaderCheney November 3, 2013 at 8:23 pm

Having the knowledge, competence, and intelligence of the commenters above, NOM CERTAINLY SHOULD have known that they didn't have a chance to win, but what the hell could they have done with the donations other than spend them and thus waste them?! As I've predicted in the past, and correctly so, Marriage Equality is going to happen for all states within 2-3 years. I used to predict 5 years… I was wrong. When SCOTUS determines that the States' Constitutions are blatantly unconstitutional, then the States will fall like dominoes into the lap of Marriage Equality. So much gnashing of teeth and crying in the wilderness there'll be in the anti-gay, bigoted camp! Beware the Full Faith and Credit clause!!!

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: