Supreme Court May Not Decide the Substance of Two Gay Marriage Cases

choi

(1) Jess Bravin, Marriage Cases May Hinge on Procedure; The Supreme Court raised the prospect that the defenders of two gay-marriage laws lack legal standing. Wall Street Journal, Mar 29, 2013.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB ... 88953763553958.html

(2) Scott Shane, Justices Say Time May Be Wrong for Ruling on Gay Marriage; Court strains to find middle ground on challenge to California's ban. New York Times, Mar 27, 2013 (Wednesday; front page banner).
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/2 ... -marriage-case.html

My comment: There is no need to read (2), which was written before the Wednesday hearing on federal law Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and thus covered California case. The banner show six justices and their quotations (clockwise fromupper left).

'How does it create an injury to them [petitioners, which California Supreme Court allow to step in after governor and state attorney general refused to appeal] separate from that of every other taxpayper to have laws enforced?'  JUSTICE SONIA SOTOMAYOR

'Have we ever granted standing to proponents of ballot initiatives?'  JUSTICE RUTH GINSBURG

'They are really no more than a group of five people who feel really strongly that we should vindicate this public interest.'  JUSTICE STEPHEN G BREYER

'I just wonder if the case was properly granted.'  JUSTICE ANTHONY M KENNEDY

'A state can't authorize anyone to proceed in federal court, because that would leave teh definition [case and controversy] under Article II of the federal Constitution as to who has standing to bring claims up to each state. And I don't think we've ever allowed anything like that.'  CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN G ROBERTS JR

'Could the state assign to any citizen the rights to defend a judgment of this kind.'  JUSTICE ELENA KAGAN