Tweet
Finally he’s moving the goal posts up to Loving v. Virginia, right where it belongs as Supreme Court decisions dance around the issue of full equality of gays and lesbians to marry. From Buzzfeed:
The Supreme Court will be hearing a challenge to one such ban, California’s Proposition 8, on March 26. The Obama administration weighed in to support the effort to have Proposition 8 found unconstitutional, but the brief did not directly state that the administration viewed all such bans as unconstitutional.
The President’s statement was made during a conversation with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos. From the transcript…
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask you a question about gay marriage. When Robin was here last spring, you came out in favor of gay marriage. But you also said at the time that you wanted it to be a state-by-state–
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Yeah. Yeah.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: –issue, it would be a mistake to nationalize it. Do you still believe that, or do you now believe that gay marriage is a right guaranteed to all Americans by the Constitution?
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Well, I’ve gotta tell you that– in terms of practical politics, what I’ve seen is a healthy debate taking place state by state, and not every state has the exact same attitudes and cultural mores. And I– you know, my thinking was that this is traditionally a state issue and– that it will work itself out.
On the other hand– what I also believe is that the core principle that people don’t get discriminated against– that’s one of our core values. And it’s in our constitution. It’s in– the– you know, 14th Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause. And– from a legal perspective, the– the– the bottom line is, is that gays have historically been discriminated against and I do think that courts have to apply what’s called heightened scrutiny, where they take a careful look. If there’s any reason for– gays and lesbians to be treated differently, boy, the government better–
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: So banning gay marriage–
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: –have a really good–
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: –is discrimination?
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Well, what I– what I believe is that– if– if the states don’t have a good justification for it, then it probably doesn’t stand up to constitutional muster
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Can you imagine one?
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: So– well, I can’t, personally. I cannot. That’s part of the conc– reason I said, ultimately, I think that– you know, same-sex couples should be able to marry. That’s my personal position. And, frankly, that’s the position that’s reflected– in the briefs that we filed– in the Supreme Court.
My hope is that– the Court looks at the evidence and– and in the California case, for example, the only reason presented for treating gays and lesbians differently was, “Well, they’re gay and lesbian.” There wasn’t– a real rationale beyond that. In fact– you know, all the other– rights and– and– responsibilities of– a civil union were identical to marriage.
It’s just you couldn’t call it marriage. Well, at that point, what you’re really sayin’ is– “We’re just gonna treat these folks differently because of who they are.” And– and I do not think– that’s– that’s who are as Americans. And– and frankly, I think– American attitudes have evolved, just like mine have– pretty substantially and fairly quickly, and I think that’s a good thing.
15 Comments
To paraphrase what Cliff Huxtable said of his son, Theo, in an old episode of The Cosby Show:
He’s EVOLVED!
>
respectfully commander-in-chief, religious bigotry against individuals doesn’t stand up to Christian or simple basic human morality muster
being or not being a judgemental religious bigot has nothing to do with the US Constitution- it has to do with personal humility and morality
And, by the way this :
“We’re just gonna treat these folks differently because of who they are.” And– and I do not think– that’s– that’s who (we) are as Americans.”
is the actual justification that you recently proffered for why you think you have the right to decide that Americans -or citizens of other countries – deserve no judicial due process prior to being exterminated ??!!??
you are talking out of both sides of yer mouth, commander-in-chief
well… I have always said the push for state amendments was based on the fact that gays win in courts so the purpose was to raise barriers so it had to be court challanges on the supreme level…
What I am not hearing is why as a gay man I would have some rights in some states and other rights or none at all in others. Thats where Mr. O needs to be at. While I would be joyed for Prop 8 to be over turned, it does nothing for me. Unless the Court issues a sweeping decision.
I wonder if Taney would have evolved?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_B._Taney
“War Criminal Opines on Constitutional Muster”
Hey, he and a Mars Bar are right twice a day.
The constitution has become like the Bible–you can’t select the parts you like and distort the meaning of other parts to fit whatever position you want to support: like extrajudicial assassinations, indefinite detention and torture.
Pardon me but I don’t take much stock in Obama’s stated opinions of the Constitution anymore. To say the least I am no Constitutional scholar so Obama is far more qualified than I am but his opinions and or actions speak to simple expediency or convenience in constitutional matters now.
.
Mind you that obama is going to heavily play up all the liberal identification issues that he can that favor him so that the liberals will continue to support him as he fervently pursues ss cuts. It helps him to differentiate himself from the nasty republicans that want to cut ss too, but in larger amounts.
Z
Well, I understand that a decision which affects only the 9th Circuit might not immediately affect you, wherever that is. But it would be an incredibly significant first step. It’s highly unlikely that any state ban on marriage equality could stand in light of that precedent. One step at a time. Wish it were faster, but there you are. Think how far we’ve come in the last fifty years. The struggle for universal suffrage for women took almost ninety years to achieve.
Obama is back to the position he stated when he first ran for the Illinois state legislature in the early 1990s.
Rarely has an “evolution” by a politician on an issue been more obviously cynical.
“President Obama: marriage equality bans don’t ‘stand up to constitutional muster’”
This coming from the constitutional law expert.
It will be interesting to see who drags this country down the toilet first: the Obama liberals, or what’s left of the GOP after their civil war.
The only principles that obama has are derived from his self-interests.
Z
For those that may be overly impressed by obama’s “evolvement” on gay issues: remember that those ss cuts that he has been so tenacious in pursuing are also going to be negatively impacting gay folks’ ss checks.
Z
One in six of Democratic bundlers are gay.
They finally drew a line in the sand as he was about to go into full campaign mode. And then, Biden spoke out of school.
So, Obama summoned to Washington an African American gay reporter, someone he knew would go easiest on him. She traveled to D.C. fresh out of a cancer treatment in order to get the interview, wherein Obama stated the same position he had stated when he first ran for the Illinois Senate.
He is a piece of work.