Republicans in NC file bill to defy same-sex marriage decision

[The Fame Joanne 5,985]

Just now, Born To Slay said:

No, the court has the same make up it had when the gay marriage ruling happened. 

That's good to hear. But I read that it will probably change while Trump is president  

[Born To Slay 10,996]

13 minutes ago, thefamegangsta said:

Why can't they just leave us alone, like... the Republicans go out of their way to restrict the rights of LGBT people every chance they get -_-

They're bad people, that's what bad people. Maybe next time the good people can vote, so evil can stay out of office.

[Born To Slay 10,996]

Just now, The Fame Joanne said:

That's good to hear. But I read that it will probably change while Trump is president  

A conservative was replaced with a conservative. So the balance stays the same. Now if a liberal dies while ztrump is in, that's trouble.  

[JohnWayne23 5,227]

I never understood how Republicans are all "Don't Tread on Me", but yet they are so committed to tread on the rights of LGBT people

[Batwings 12,957]

Dear NC Republicans,

[The Fame Joanne 5,985]

8 minutes ago, Born To Slay said:

A conservative was replaced with a conservative. So the balance stays the same. Now if a liberal dies while ztrump is in, that's trouble.  

Then what was all the fuzz about, with Trump's Supreme Court candidates?  If Scalia is the only one he will replace, then he can only replace an asshole and even if he picks another asshole (which seems like he did), nothing will change 

[Ikvs 2,576]

Republicans kys

[LePetitGAGABLover 21,234]

Republicans can enact all the laws they want, but us gays will still continue to like ****. So ya'll can continue to seethe like the sewer rats that you are. 

[venusfly 17,885]

they can file all they want but they cant overturn a supreme court ruling  thats the whole point of the supreme court

[Born To Slay 10,996]

32 minutes ago, The Fame Joanne said:

Then what was all the fuzz about, with Trump's Supreme Court candidates?  If Scalia is the only one he will replace, then he can only replace an asshole and even if he picks another asshole (which seems like he did), nothing will change 

The controversy is that if a liberal court justice dies, then the conservatives will have a majority.

[The Fame Joanne 5,985]

2 minutes ago, Born To Slay said:

The controversy is that if a liberal court justice dies, then the conservatives will have a majority.

Yes but I think it will rarely be even with a system that allows the president to pick the judges 

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

Literally, a concentration camp for homosexuals was just created in Chechnya. And they decide to continue with their anti-gay rhetoric...

[MJHolland 12,725]

1 hour ago, M Monstre said:

But it's a Supreme Court decision, you can't just "deny" that, right? I mean, you could try, but the Supreme Court ruled it so, so contesting it seems pointless.

  Hide contents

We recently covered our civil rights unit in my history class, and this is the exact same thing that conservative states were doing, expect instead of same-sex marriage, it was about a person's race.

History will always repeat itself, I guess.

 

This is the case but if it goes back to the supreme court they can always change their mind since the precedent is so new. Unlikely but it could always happen with Gorsuch + another Trump nom. 

Basically if any Justice resigns, Republicans could reverse marriage equality easily.

Nothing we can do about it at this point but pray RBG keeps her health up. 

[REALITY 80,162]

1 minute ago, MJHolland said:

This is the case but if it goes back to the supreme court they can always change their mind since the precedent is so new. Unlikely but it could always happen with Gorsuch + another Trump nom. 

Basically if any Justice resigns, Republicans could reverse marriage equality easily.

Nothing we can do about it at this point but pray RBG keeps her health up. 

Doesn't it need to be overturned by getting a new case though? From my understanding, you just can't overturn something, but you'd need a completely new case to change the precedent. Like, you can't just overturn Roe v. Wade, you'd need a new case that gets brought up to the Supreme Court and then try to overturn it from there, but even then, that's pretty difficult. 

[MJHolland 12,725]

1 hour ago, The Fame Joanne said:

Then what was all the fuzz about, with Trump's Supreme Court candidates?  If Scalia is the only one he will replace, then he can only replace an asshole and even if he picks another asshole (which seems like he did), nothing will change 

The problem is if another liberal justice resigns, which is a strong possibility.

Even still it is unorthodox to go against precedent (which is now in our favor), but in no way are they bound to it. They can decide whatever they want and there is literally no institution or mechanism that can check their power unless we amend the constitution to add gays (hiiiiighhly unlikely)

Sorry if someone already explained this