tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post4054007343256617120..comments2023-10-21T11:37:50.732-04:00Comments on The Blackbook Legal Blog: Iowa Supreme Court Unanimously Rules in Favor of Same-Sex MarriageUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post-30414777767375042512013-06-05T04:10:51.199-04:002013-06-05T04:10:51.199-04:00natural treatment fatty liver natural treatment fa...natural treatment fatty liver natural treatment fatty liver <br />natural treatment fatty liver<br /><br />Also visit my web page <a href="http://fattyliverhelp.com/" rel="nofollow">fatty liver alcohol treatment</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post-76715231316082102502009-04-03T14:58:00.000-04:002009-04-03T14:58:00.000-04:00N.B. One other observation I'll post here, rather ...N.B. One other observation I'll post here, rather in the main body: the Iowa Supreme Court, so far as I know, depended on at *least* two student notes. One of them was brought to my attention by <A HREF="http://lawdork.wordpress.com/2009/04/03/congrats/" REL="nofollow">LawDork 2.0</A>, and the other by the Editor-and-Chief of the law journal I'm on, as a former comment from my journal was also cited in the opinion.<BR/><BR/>Given the prior discussions here regarding the <A HREF="http://blackbooklegal.blogspot.com/2009/03/merits-of-student-scholarship.html" REL="nofollow">merits of student scholarship</A>, I find this very interesting and will be addressing this topic further in the days to come.CRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06418939857753947421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post-29348693935739248082009-04-03T14:50:00.000-04:002009-04-03T14:50:00.000-04:00@ Fred--It appears the reasoning you cited from Ab...@ Fred--<BR/><BR/>It appears the reasoning you cited from Above the Law is correct. Per Volokh Conspiracy: <A HREF="http://www.volokh.com/posts/1238779100.shtml" REL="nofollow">Amending the Iowa Constitution Would Take Time</A>. I'll post this as an update in the main thread as well.<BR/><BR/>@ Jeff--<BR/><BR/>There's absolutely nothing the Supreme Court can do in this case...Michigan v. Long is controlling, as Fred correctly notes. <BR/><BR/>You're entitled to your views, but you do need to understand that we're just reporting on what's happening in the legal world. Everything in my original post was summarizing what the Court did, except for the last paragraph where I pointed out two things that--in my opinion--were interesting. So I'm not really promulgating anything, but my own opinion (and am only doing so in a limited fashion). Continue to feel free to disagree, though we'd prefer you do so in a slightly-less bombastic fashion.CRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06418939857753947421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post-75346789891354203752009-04-03T13:37:00.000-04:002009-04-03T13:37:00.000-04:00@12:38:According to the commentary at ATL (fwiw), ...@12:38:<BR/>According to the commentary at ATL (fwiw), the Iowa constitutional amendment process requires an amendment to be passed by both houses of the legislature on 2 consecutive terms and then accepted by a majority of the electorate. That would put the target date at least 2 years out before this could be touched by amendment.<BR/><BR/>@ Jeff:<BR/>The reason that the U.S. Supremes can't hear this case is because of the concepts of federalism and dual sovereignty. Moreover, unless you have some sort of inside-track on the Prop. 8 opinion's drafting, you can't know if it will be federally-reviewable. It will most likely be unreviewable by the U.S. Supremes b/c the law and the proposition are exclusive state issues and were rooted overwhelmingly in state law. <BR/><BR/>@ 1:29.<BR/>Well said.Fred Bastiathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13521418879469327375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post-49714188222877603872009-04-03T13:29:00.000-04:002009-04-03T13:29:00.000-04:00Jeff,What makes me sick is reading comments from p...Jeff,<BR/><BR/>What makes me sick is reading comments from people who make comments in passing about what is "inherently wrong morally." Obviously, your anger on this issue is deeply rooted in something other than your knowledge of law, which is probably a good thing because I am astounded by the number of mistakes in your legal reasoning above.<BR/><BR/>If you don't like gay marriage, don't get one, and if you don't like reading other people's analysis of court cases, don't read them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post-13327353624473023602009-04-03T13:14:00.000-04:002009-04-03T13:14:00.000-04:00I don't understand why the Supreme Court can't hea...I don't understand why the Supreme Court can't hear this case but it doesnt matter because they'll here the Proposition 8 case probably. Or something else. There's no way this stands, it's blatantly unconstitutional.Jeffnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post-29502373197196438752009-04-03T12:38:00.000-04:002009-04-03T12:38:00.000-04:00Iowa will overturn this via constitutional amendme...Iowa will overturn this via constitutional amendment a la CaliforniaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post-50628753907895927122009-04-03T12:10:00.000-04:002009-04-03T12:10:00.000-04:00See Michigan v. Long ("if [a] state court chooses ...See Michigan v. Long ("if [a] state court chooses merely to rely on federal precedents as it would on precedents of all other jurisdictions, then it need only make clear by plain statement in its judgment or opinion that federal cases are being used only for purpose of guidance, and do not themselves compel result that court has reached.")Fred Bastiathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13521418879469327375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post-87755875647250293572009-04-03T12:03:00.000-04:002009-04-03T12:03:00.000-04:00Footnote 6 = epic pwnage of Federal review. Sorry ...Footnote 6 = epic pwnage of Federal review. Sorry Jeff... no Supreme review for you!Fred Bastiathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13521418879469327375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post-54470916257425086782009-04-03T11:58:00.000-04:002009-04-03T11:58:00.000-04:00Note- if Craig's analysis is correct, then there i...Note- if Craig's analysis is correct, then there isn't a damn thing the U.S. Supremes can do about this.Fred Bastiathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13521418879469327375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post-78628914181054227722009-04-03T11:55:00.000-04:002009-04-03T11:55:00.000-04:00Jeff:Here's a syllogism I think you can follow.(1)...Jeff:<BR/>Here's a syllogism I think you can follow.<BR/><BR/>(1) We're a legal blog<BR/>(2) Courts rule on legal things (they're called issues)<BR/>(3) We report and/or analyze on what Courts rule on<BR/><BR/>Application:<BR/>(1) We're a legal blog <BR/>(2) Gay marriage is an issue a court has recently considered<BR/>(3) We, in turn, report and analyze the Iowa gay marriage ruling.<BR/><BR/>Is the sharing of a legal opinion on a blog the equivalent to 'promulgating[...] garbage?' Um, no.<BR/><BR/>Jeff, you seem like a guy in touch with his religious side--Perhaps you can pray to St. Fu.Fred Bastiathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13521418879469327375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post-44832829639148368332009-04-03T11:50:00.000-04:002009-04-03T11:50:00.000-04:00Note-Hopefully the U.S. Supreme Court will fix thi...Note-Hopefully the U.S. Supreme Court will fix this abominationJeffnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7911788560018241640.post-67620273559151368592009-04-03T11:47:00.000-04:002009-04-03T11:47:00.000-04:00I am getting so sick of people at this website. T...I am getting so sick of people at this website. The legal reasoning here is flawed...the decision is flawed. What right does the IOWA SC have to strike a law banning something, when the PEOPLE chose it in the first place? NONE. Furthermore, gay marriage is inherently wrong morally, but that is besides the point. The worst thing is promulgating this type of garbage on a blog.Jeffnoreply@blogger.com