The Supreme Court of the United States today denied review of seven lower court decisions striking down Defense of Marriage acts or marriage amendments.  The decisions striking down these laws and amendments will clear the way for same-sex marriage in Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Wisconsin and Virginia, as well as, states that have a similar law in the jurisdiction of those circuit courts such as Colorado, Kansas, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

Currently Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Kentucky, Michigan, Tennessee and Texas have pending appeals after their laws/amendments defining marriage to be between a man and a woman were struck down by a lower court.

Prior to this decision by the Supreme Court same-sex marriage licenses were granted in California, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Iowa, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.

The Court denied review (without any comment) of the seven petitions:  Bogan v. Baskin (Indiana); Walker v. Wolf (Wisconsin); Herbert v. Kitchen (Utah); McQuigg v. Bostic (Virginia); Rainey v. Bostic (Virginia); Schaefer v. Bostic (Virginia); and Smith v. Bishop (Oklahoma).

Defenders of traditional marriage vowed to fight on.

“The court’s decision not to take up this issue now means that the marriage battle will continue. Several federal courts – including those in the 5th, 6th, 8th, and 11th circuits – still have cases working their way to the Supreme Court. ADF will continue to remain a leader in the critical effort for the freedom of the people. The people should decide this issue, not the courts,” said Bryon Baboine, a senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom, who filed in defense of Oklahoma’s and Virginia’s marriage laws.

Update:  Concerned Women for America CEO Penny Nance released the following statement:

It is important to note that the Supreme Court has not ruled on the constitutionality of same-sex ‘marriage.’  They have merely declined to address the issue at this point in time, and that is actually better than imposing their view of marriage on the whole country.  Americans are having a robust debate on this important issue, and for the Supreme Court to interrupt that debate and decide the issue for the country would be disastrous.

This is exactly what they did in the case of abortion in the Roe v. Wade decision, and we have seen the damage that their judiciary overreach has had on the country.

The problem we have in this case is that some lower courts have overstepped their bounds and ruled several state marriage amendments unconstitutional. That judicial activism, overturning the will of millions of Americans who went to the polls to say they wanted marriage to remain as the union between one man and one woman, will stand.  But also other decisions and marriage amendments supporting natural marriage will also stand. That means the battle to protect God’s model for marriage will continue, and the Supreme Court will have to take the case at some point. We must continue to stand boldly for freedom of conscience and for natural marriage.

In that sense, we cannot overemphasize the importance of the upcoming elections.  President Obama and the Democratic leadership have done historic damage to marriage in their time in office, both with their appointment of judges and with their administrative policies.  Conservatives must come out to the polls in the upcoming elections in overwhelming numbers and make sure that our elected officials and the next President of the United States respect and appreciate the right of the people to define marriage as it has always been throughout our history – the union between one man and one woman.

The FAMiLY Leader issues their statement this afternoon:

This morning’s disappointing SCOTUS non-ruling amounts to a handful of appointed, virtually non-accountable Judges punting on their duty.  SCOTUS had the opportunity to correct numerous, legally and morally twisted lower court decisions.  Those judges’ opinions fly in the face of 6000 years of human history, they disregard our Nation’s founding legal principles of “…the Laws of Nature and  of Nature’s God,” and they disrespect tens of millions of voters in many States, who passed Constitutional Amendments declaring what God, Nature, history and common sense all know:  marriage can only truly be between one man and one woman.

The political ramifications of today’s “punt” should be obvious.  “We the People” are under attack regarding our rights of conscience, our religious liberty, and our very religious/moral beliefs which were shared by the Founders.  This overt, post-modern arrogance has led to much pent up frustration by the voters.  It should motivate and necessitate our thorough vetting of candidates for public office, and of current officeholders, by pressuring them to tell us, “What are you going to do about this?   What is your leadership strategy to right this ship?  What’s your remedy to this leftist takeover by judges, who are flying in the face of ‘the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God’?”

Furthermore, why would any governor or state legislature capitulate to these Judges?  As Jefferson and Lincoln noted, judges aren’t the most powerful branch of government.  The other two branches have as much say constitutionally, and more say practically, than the judiciary.  Where are the Lincolns and the Jeffersons of our era?

Subscribe For Latest Updates

Sign up to receive stimulating conservative Christian commentary in your inbox.

Invalid email address
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Thanks for subscribing!
  1. While it’s gratifying to know that Gay couples in West Virginia, where I live, may soon be able to legally marry by default … I still feel sorry for all those couples in other states whose marriages are still in legal limbo.

    Perhaps this is simply SCOTUS’ way of allowing people in more states to get used to the issue, so that WHEN they finally rule in favor of marriage equality, there won’t be so much wailing and gnashing of teeth. But the court really should have just taken care of this issue once and for all.

  2. Sorry to hear the Supreme Court has a different understanding of the Constitution than the Founders, and a totally different idea of freedom.

      1. Actually, they knew way more than we give them credit for. And they often quoted the Bible. They believed marriage is between a man and a woman, and said so pretty much whenever a man and a woman got married. Sodomy was against the law until a few years ago. Sodomy used to be considered immoral, illegal, and insane and the laws reflected that. Three walls to keep it at bay. They wouldn’t have approved of defining deviancy down. They were for raising people’s standards, not lowering them.

      2. They also would never have anticipated the internet, rapid global air travel, nuclear weapons, the modern civil rights movement, our religiously pluralistic society, and our much more enlightened understanding of human psychology and evolution.

      3. People who want to change our society into a tyranny changed the laws, and for that reason. The unelected judges at the Supreme Court are not supposed to run the country. To think it is O.K. for them to make law or change the law is not a sign of enlightenment.

      4. It is not the courts’ job to uphold the precise will of the majority of the people. That’s what elections are for. The job of the courts is to uphold the Constitution, regardless of whether the necessary decisions fall in line with the will of the majority. It is up to the judges to determine, without bias from the rest of the population, what constitutes equality under the law, or equal protection. It seems more than obvious to me that to exclude Gays from the institution of marriage is a clear violation of any notion of “equality,” and I have yet to see anyone dispute that on a rational level. Therefore, it is not “activism” on the part of judges to declare that Gay and Straight couples should be treated equally under the law, rather it is an example of judges performing their rightful duty.

      5. Sin has not gone out of style in the last five thousand years. Most of the time it has been supported by governments and now it is supported by ours. It is activism on the part of the judges, and the ACLU and people connected to them like the leftist Mark Osler. And the homosexual judge on the ninth circuit court in California. You can google Mark Osler or the ACLU and find out exactly what they want for this country. You can listen to Obama’s speeches. He told the LGBT community before he was first elected what he would do for them and has given speeches in front of their groups over the years on a regular basis. Remember “don’t ask, don’t tell?” that was when we were more concerned with military discipline and even hygiene, not the promotion of irrational, short term relationships based on sexual preference. The left, including the Progressives have had an agenda for this country since before the Socialist John Dewey. Google him. They keep throwing stuff against the wall until it sticks.

  3. Also, last week a Missouri judge ordered the state to recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages. In light of Monday’s denial of cert by the Supreme Court, the attorney general said he would not contest the ruling. That should be good news for Iowa’s border counties.

  4. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals today ruled against same-sex marriage bans in Idaho and Nevada. Good.

      1. Uhh, Shane, did you miss virtually every federal court, including the 4th, 7th, and 10th Circuits ruling against bans on same-sex marriage?

  5. Wow, what a week. Same-sex marriage comes to Utah, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Indiana, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Nevada, and, after some legal technicalities, Idaho.

Comments are closed.

You May Also Like

Notre Dame President: Feinstein’s Litmus Test for Judges Is “Chilling”

University of Notre Dame President to Dianne Feinstein: “It is chilling to hear from a United States Senator that (faith) might now disqualify someone.”

Cruz Defund ObamaCare Filibuster Live

FreedomWorks is running a livestream of Senator Ted Cruz’s filibuster.  You can…

Muslims… The Final Frontier

Silly me I thought NASA’s mission was to go into space, but…

Feds Spend $6.7 Million on Promoting Mango Consumption

Quin Hillyer: Critics like Judicial Watch imply that it’s a legitimate question to ask why the National Mango Board, or others like it such as the National Honey Board, the National Peanut Board, and the National Popcorn Board, needs federal government support or oversight at all.