Sorry -- excuse me: they're calling it an amicus curiae brief. It just reads like a press release, starting with NOM's version of the questions to be argued:
The questions the court actually wanted addressed are as follows:
It goes downhill from there. The whole brief is at the first link above. I may come back to it -- it's a cloudy, nasty day, so I may get bored enough to pick it apart.
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
1. Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to redefine marriage and license a marriage between two people of the same sex, contrary to express, recently reaffirmed vote of the people of the state?
2. Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex performed out of state, when doing so is contrary to the state’s own fundamental policy decision?
The questions the court actually wanted addressed are as follows:
1) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex?
2) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state?
It goes downhill from there. The whole brief is at the first link above. I may come back to it -- it's a cloudy, nasty day, so I may get bored enough to pick it apart.
No comments:
Post a Comment