Same-sex marriage cases wind their way to Supreme Court

Political change is going on it washington right now when a public poll said that 2/3 of americans would vote for a qualified gay presidential candidate. This may be in the near future. President Obama has elected 4 gay candidates for the bench in the Supreme Court and there has been a already confirmed federal judge. Gay rights groups are happy with there current progress, having gained serious political ground. The house filed the legal brief, Defense of Marriage Act, thats prevents any gay marriage preformed legally in a state to be federally recognized. DOMA will not go in front of any judges until 2013. California's proposition 8 appeal is bouncing back from california courts to 9th circuit courts. Judge Joseph Tauro ruled it unconstitutional that DOMA defined marriage as a legal union only between one man and one woman. That appeal is in 1st Circuit courts. Gay rights being meet through judicial means is a distinct possibility for the near future.

Gay rights groups are using the court pathway of action. They are gaining there means through the courts and so far it has been exceedingly successful. They have found that this pathway of action has helped to give there cause serious political ground. Many americans and other politicians are speaking up and supporting gay rights. If and when these cases are brought to the supreme court, there will most likely be a decision made in favor of these gay rights movements. Another issue that the court may face when presented with these cases is weather same sex marriage is a state power or a federal power. The same butting heads that the court sees all the time. Is it constitutional for the federal government to control weather states acknowledge same sex marriage? We will see the Supreme Court make a decision on this issue in the near future.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/same-sex-marriage-cases-wind-their-way-to-supreme-court-as-political-climate-changes/2011/09/25/gIQABW03wK_story.html

Clarifying Second Amendment Rights

Currently, there is a struggle with applying the Second Amendment right to recent cases. In 2008, District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago concluded that under the Second Amendment rights, people can own a gun unrelated to the military services and the right to "keep and bear arms" extends beyond federal territory to the states. Since then, statistics show that there are two cases per week going through lower courts challenging gun restrictions. The problem is, these lower courts are finding it hard to deal with these cases based off

the guidance of the two cases above. As the Court of Appeals puts it "If the Supreme Court. . .meant its holding to extend beyond home possession, it will need to say so more plainly.”. Currently there are two recent cases challenging the Second Amendment (click here to see the description of this amendment). One deals with a man named Charles F. Williams Jr, who had a gun in his car when he was driving home from his girlfriend's house without a permit, and the other case deals with a man named Sean Masciandaro who was convicted of violating a ban on having a loaded firearm in a vehicle on national parkland. Both challenge the idea that if there is a Second Amendment right to carry a gun outside the home, it surely applies to citizens carrying handguns while traveling on public highways and carrying one on the outskirts of a national parkland.

Asking the Supreme Court to clarify Amendments is a constant struggle that the justices are faced with everyday. The decisions from Heller and Mcdonald gave a green light to those wishing to challenge gun restrictions across the country, which in total has faced the rest of the country's court's with a hard time of making verdicts that are just under Heller and Mcdonald. This particular Amendment is really up to interpretation recently, because guns serious weapons of harm and whether or not one should carry one outside of the house has been a huge debate for many years. Even after the 5-4 decision of the District of Columbia v. Heller to carry a gun outside the home, people are still being charged for that exact reason. This amendment is also shown to be broadly interpreted through the case of Sean Masciandaro who did have a gun in possession in a national park, but because it's outside of the home, his lawyer Peyton is arguing that solely because the gun is outside of the home, he has the right to carry it virtually anywhere.

Article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/cases-lining-up-to-ask-supreme-court-to-clarify-second-amendment-rights/2011/08/11/gIQAioihFJ_story.html