Posts Tagged ‘supreme court’

Everybody is writing about the court ruling on the Arizona Law. On Morning Joe today they talked a little about the national political reaction.

On Morning Joe they briefly discussed the political impact of the ruling. Charles Blow of the NYT lived up to his name blowing smoke claiming it helps the White House while Mike Barnicle made an important point telling a story that MSNBC viewers likely never heard.

I have yet to see anyone point to the BIG effect this will have on the election. Not in 2010 (everyone knows that the Arizona Law helps republicans) but in 2012.

No matter who the Republican Nominee is they will be able to point to this ruling by a Clinton appointee, they will likely be able to point to a Supreme Court that will have every justice appointed by Barack Obama ruling against said law (Let’s not pretend Justice Sotomayor or a future justice Kagan will vote otherwise).

Abortion is usually the big gun (and don’t get me wrong I expect any republican appointee to be against abortion) but this is an argument that is going to resonate on 2012. Conservatives and tea party members should be making the point every time they make a stop that a vote for Obama is a vote to strike down the Arizona law in the supreme court.

If the ad isn’t already cut it oughta be.

Oh and the “Hispanic” vote is not monolithic on this issue no matter what Chuck Todd says on Morning Joe today.

How is it the judges here are such idiots?

A federal district court judge in Boston today struck down the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as a union exclusively between a man and a woman.

Judge Joseph L. Tauro ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage law violates the Constitutional right of married same-sex couples to equal protection under the law and upends the federal government’s long history of allowing states to set their own marriage laws.

This is going to be a big game changer. Liberal sites on Memeorandom are all over it.

First of all those who said a constitutional amendment was not necessary have no leg to stand on, however those who were saying that knew it was false when they said it, they were playing for time. Little did they know that time state after state, even ones as liberal as Maine and California would reject Gay Marriage at the ballot box. So much for stalling for time.

Second of all democrats in borderline districts are now going to be in even worse shape. If the party opposes an amendment even more seats will be lost in swing states.

Third of all this is a big issue in both the Black and Latino communities and it’s an issue that the democratic party is on the wrong side of. They don’t want to deal with it but now they have no choice.

Fourth of all suddenly the Elena Kagan nomination becomes perhaps something worth fighting for and a test vote on gay marriage that democratic senators don’t want to have.

Finally this forces the president to make a call. If he comes out in favor of gay marriage that will be a bridge too far for the religious Black community particularly with only one vote making the difference on the court. There is no barrier to break anymore. That will be the difference in 2012. Expect him to speak against this ruling, but avoid introducing a constitutional amendment unless he is sure it will be defeated.

In one respect the timing isn’t bad for democrats, this is going to be a bad year anyway so you might as well get it all over with.

Glenn Reynolds links to this post at Cato concerning Specter’s questioning of Kagan and dissatisfaction with her answers.

The most memorable part of today’s first session of questioning (9am till after 1pm) was undoubtedly Arlen Specter pressing the nominee to answer questions about various lawsuits of special concern to him … Specter was extremely dissatisfied, to the point where his vote is legitimately in doubt.

Why is this so interesting? Well Specter’s time in the senate will be over in January. He has been rejected by democratic primary voters and no longer needs to please him and can’t and won’t get anything from Republicans. Thus for the first time in decades has absolutely no political skin in the game.

This vote will likely be one of the few times where he will be voting solely on what he actually thinks. I don’t know if anyone really cares but it will be interesting to see.

going back and forth between their blogs concerning Kagan and the military issue.