Marriage equality gets its day in court
It will be a historic day at the Supreme Court this morning, as part of a historic week. Today, the justices will consider the constitutionality of California’s ban on same-sex marriage, a law generally known as Proposition 8, followed by related arguments tomorrow challenging the legality of the Defense of Marriage Act. Let’s briefly review what to expect today.
At issue is a case called Hollingsworth v. Perry, brought forward by legal heavyweights — David Boies and former Solicitor General Ted Olson, who faced against one another in Bush v. Gore — challenging California’s ban, approved in 2008. They were successful at both the federal district court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, though as Adam Liptak explained, the latter court issued a narrower ruling: the jurists concluded that “voters were not entitled to withdraw a constitutional right once it had been established by the State Supreme Court.”
The reasoning appeared calculated to appeal to Justice Anthony Kennedy, and if upheld, it would not automatically invalidate other bans on marriage equality in other states. More on him later.
More here: http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/03/26/17470902-marriage-equality-gets-its-day-in-court?lite
Alaska Sen. Mark Begich Says “Same Sex Couples Should Be Able To Marry”
“I believe that same sex couples should be able to marry and should have the same rights, privileges and responsibilities as any other married couple,” the Alaskan senator said in what appears to be his first direct statement on the subject.
“Government should keep out of individuals’ personal lives—if someone wants to marry someone they love, they should be able to. Alaskans are fed up with government intrusion into our private lives, our daily business, and in the way we manage our resources and economy,” he continued.
More here: http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/alaska-sen-mark-begich-says-same-sex-couples-should-be-able
Starbucks CEO Doubles Down on Gay-Marriage Support, Telling Shareholder to Sell Stake if He Doesn’t Like Views
“If you feel, respectfully, that you can get a higher return than the 38% you got last year, it’s a free country. You can sell your shares of Starbucks and buy shares in another company. Thank you very much,” Schultz said, to applause from the audience.
Progress Weekly 
Reblogged this on The Obama Diary.
While most people are focusing on Justice Kennedy, they should also be considering Chief Justice Roberts. Aside from his past as a practicing lawyer, he has also shown himself to be extremely aware of how his court will be judged by history. It’s pretty obvious which way the American people are moving on this issue, all screams from the religious social conservatives to the contrary. So I don’t think he’ll want “The Roberts Court” to be remembered as “the one which had the awful ruling just before the rest of the country made it moot.”
My seat of the pants prediction is that he’ll find a narrowly crafted way to uphold the lower court’s ruling, and find a way to say that DOMA is not constitutional. It may not be what the liberals want, it most definitely won’t be what the conservatives want, but it’ll do. He showed that in the Affordable Care Act ruling, when instead of going with the Commerce Clause, he went with the “power of taxation” clause to make his ruling.