What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

FreshFish said:
I heard some more background on the 17-yr old CT teen with cancer. Doctor A diagnosed her and recommended chemo. The mother asked for a copy of her daughter's medical records and said she wanted to get a second opinion before agreeing to follow through on Doctor A's prescription. Doctor A then called DFS and asked for the daughter to be removed from parental care.

If true, this detail sheds a whole different, unsavory light on the whole picture.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's not so good...
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

FreshFish said:
I heard some more background on the 17-yr old CT teen with cancer. Doctor A diagnosed her and recommended chemo. The mother asked for a copy of her daughter's medical records and said she wanted to get a second opinion before agreeing to follow through on Doctor A's prescription. Doctor A then called DFS and asked for the daughter to be removed from parental care.

If true, this detail sheds a whole different, unsavory light on the whole picture.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the clip they showed on the news here had one of the justices reading her decision, saying what compelled her was that the 17-year old said under oath that she would accept treatment and then ran away from home. That's an angle I hadn't heard before. I honestly don't know how I feel about this. In theory, I agree with the defense lawyer who asked "Does the right magically come into being when you wake up on your 18th birthday?" but I have my doubts in this case. Not everyone matures at the same rate and is ready to make decisions at 18 while others are ready when they 15 or 16. That's why I have a problem with arbitrarily setting an age.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

FreshFish said:
I heard some more background on the 17-yr old CT teen with cancer. Doctor A diagnosed her and recommended chemo. The mother asked for a copy of her daughter's medical records and said she wanted to get a second opinion before agreeing to follow through on Doctor A's prescription. Doctor A then called DFS and asked for the daughter to be removed from parental care.

If true, this detail sheds a whole different, unsavory light on the whole picture.
Click to expand...

cite?
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Priceless said:
Yeah, the clip they showed on the news here had one of the justices reading her decision, saying what compelled her was that the 17-year old said under oath that she would accept treatment and then ran away from home. That's an angle I hadn't heard before. I honestly don't know how I feel about this. In theory, I agree with the defense lawyer who asked "Does the right magically come into being when you wake up on your 18th birthday?" but I have my doubts in this case. Not everyone matures at the same rate and is ready to make decisions at 18 while others are ready when they 15 or 16. That's why I have a problem with arbitrarily setting an age.
Click to expand...

It should come down to whether she is competent to make the decision. If she is not impaired, is reasonably educated and knows the risks of her choices who are we to tell her what to do?
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Handyman said:
It should come down to whether she is competent to make the decision. If she is not impaired, is reasonably educated and knows the risks of her choices who are we to tell her what to do?
Click to expand...
I'm agreeing with Handyman. I feel a small shudder.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Handyman said:
It should come down to whether she is competent to make the decision. If she is not impaired, is reasonably educated and knows the risks of her choices who are we to tell her what to do?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Her age shouldn't enter into the equation.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

FreshFish said:
I heard some more background on the 17-yr old CT teen with cancer. Doctor A diagnosed her and recommended chemo. The mother asked for a copy of her daughter's medical records and said she wanted to get a second opinion before agreeing to follow through on Doctor A's prescription. Doctor A then called DFS and asked for the daughter to be removed from parental care.

If true, this detail sheds a whole different, unsavory light on the whole picture.
Click to expand...

Did you hear that from your cousin's nephew's ex-wife?
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

And here it is, boys and girls. Cert has officially been granted on the 6th Circuit gay marriage cases. 2 questions were granted:
1) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex? (90 minutes of oral argument)
2) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state? (60 minutes of oral argument)

They'll be argued at the end of April, with the opinion most likely coming in late June.

I'm predicting either 5-4 or 6-3 in favor of equality, depending on how bad Roberts thinks it'll look in the history books if he votes against it. Either way Kennedy writes the majority opinion, solidifying his place in gay rights history.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

unofan said:
And here it is, boys and girls. Cert has officially been granted on the 6th Circuit gay marriage cases. 2 questions were granted:
1) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex? (90 minutes of oral argument)
2) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state? (60 minutes of oral argument)

They'll be argued at the end of April, with the opinion most likely coming in late June.

I'm predicting either 5-4 or 6-3 in favor of equality, depending on how bad Roberts thinks it'll look in the history books if he votes against it. Either way Kennedy writes the majority opinion, solidifying his place in gay rights history.
Click to expand...
Just curious - what if, as they should have done in Roe, leave it up to the States?
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

joecct said:
Just curious - what if, as they should have done in Roe, leave it up to the States?
Click to expand...

Then gay marriage eventually becomes legal nationwide in piecemeal fashion anyway once the Boomers die off in sufficient numbers. It just will take an extra 50 years for about 15 states (mainly in the deep south) to get with it.

But don't mistake my answering your question as validating its premise. Because your assumptions are not correct.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

unofan said:
I'm predicting either 5-4 or 6-3 in favor of equality, depending on how bad Roberts thinks it'll look in the history books if he votes against it. Either way Kennedy writes the majority opinion, solidifying his place in gay rights history.
Click to expand...

I wonder if Roberts will concur to get the right to write the majority opinion, and then water it down with all sorts of funny business?

But I guess if he was planning to do that he'd just have denied cert.

Since he's got another 20 years as CJ, and we all know that as with desegregation this is never going to move backwards, he probably just wants it off the docket once and for all.

The other interesting question is just how delusional Scalia is. Will he write the equivalent of a Taney Dred Scott in dissent, completely overshadowing the rest of his career with the label "that homophobic azzwipe"?
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

unofan said:
Only takes four votes to grant cert, so even if he voted against it the liberal wing could've granted it by themselves.
Click to expand...

I learned something today on USCHO! :)
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Maybe we can finally move on as a nation this June.

Someone on face the nation suggested 6-3 with Roberts in the majority.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

unofan said:
I'm predicting either 5-4 or 6-3 in favor of equality, depending on how bad Roberts thinks it'll look in the history books if he votes against it. Either way Kennedy writes the majority opinion, solidifying his place in gay rights history.
Click to expand...
Because, of course, Roberts would never actually vote for it because he happens to think that's what the law requires, right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top