Supreme Court takes no action on same-sex marriage cases, for now
The U.S. Supreme Court didn’t act on seven petitions under consideration about same-sex marriage issues on Thursday morning, but it did accept several other significant cases for its next term.
In orders released by the Court, the Justices will add 11 new cases for arguments in its next term, which starts on Monday.
Link: Looking at gay marriage petitions in front of the Supreme Court
The seven petitions on same-sex marriage were among more than 100 considered by the Justices on Monday, but as expected by some Court watchers, they weren’t listed among the cases granted or denied by the Justices. (It takes four of the nine Justices to agree to accept a case for it to come before the Court.)
One factor could be the outcome of a pending case in the Sixth Circuit that could uphold same-sex marriage bans in four states. Such a decision would create a split among federal appeals court decisions that would accelerate the issue for consideration by the Justices.
The next scheduled date for opinions to be released in Monday, October 6, the first day the Court is in session for its next term. The Justices could accept a combination of the same-sex marriage cases, accept a single case, wait for more lower court opinions, or deny the cases.
Among the new cases accepted by the Court are the following:
In Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, the Court will revisit the issue of housing discrimination by accepting a case from Texas in which the state’s housing authority is accused of racial bias. But the question in the case is limited to the issue of disparate impact.
In Williams-Yulee v. The Florida Bar, Lanell Williams-Yulee, a candidate for county clerk judge in Florida, personally signed a 2009 campaign fundraising letter. The Florida Bar says that violates the state’s Code of Judicial Conduct—and the Florida Supreme Court agrees. Williams-Yulee is now turning to the First Amendment and our nation’s high court for help.
In Equal Opportunity Employment Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch, Samantha Elauf applied to work for the famous clothing retailer but was rejected. The EEOC took up the case, contending that Elauf, a Muslim, was denied employment because she wears a headscarf. But the agency lost in the Tenth Circuit and is now asking the Supreme Court to intervene.
In Kerry v. Din, Fauzia Din, an American citizen, applied for a visa for her Afghani husband, but the visa was denied. She is looking for the Supreme Court to hold that she has a constitutionally protected interest in her marriage and a right to challenge the government’s visa denial in court
The Court also postponed jurisdiction in the redistricting case of Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission until it can consider two questions in the case.
Recent Stories on Constitution Daily
Jeffrey Rosen interviews Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Will Scalia’s words cement same-sex marriage into the law?
JConstitution Check: What if the Supreme Court takes a pass now on same-sex marriage?
