https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r Supreme Court Case en-us 2020-11-16 16:24:49 UTC 2020-11-18 19:10:15 UTC hello@padlet.com nmcgee6358 https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/928687992 Chief Justice: Roberts
Associate Justices: Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, and Kagan.]]> 2020-11-16 18:45:02 UTC https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/928687992 nmcgee6358 https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/928701553 Same sex couples sued state agencies in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennesse to challenge the constitutionality of those state's ban on same sex marriage.]]> 2020-11-16 18:47:31 UTC https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/928701553 nmcgee6358 https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/928722890 The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit was the lower court in this case. The Lower court decided to uphold the laws that banned same sex marriage. ]]> 2020-11-16 18:51:32 UTC https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/928722890 nmcgee6358 https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/928778585 The petitioner is James Obergefell. The respondant is Richard Hodges. Obergefells reasoning for the case was that the state's ban on same sex marriage was a violation of the fourteenth amendment and civil rights. While Hodges reasoned that the issue didn't concern the federal government, but the states.]]> 2020-11-16 19:02:21 UTC https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/928778585 nmcgee6358 https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/928812358 There were actually 2 questions trying to be answered by the Supreme Court. The first one was: "Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to licence a marriage between two people of the same sex?" and the second one was: "Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex that was legally licensed and performed in another state?". ]]> 2020-11-16 19:08:58 UTC https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/928812358 nmcgee6358 https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/928830399 In a 5-4 decision made by Justice Kennedy the court decided that the Fourteenth Amendment requires both marriage licensing and recognition for same sex couples. ]]> 2020-11-16 19:12:38 UTC https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/928830399 nmcgee6358 https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/929120527 Four Justices had a dissenting opinion to the case. Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Scalia, Justice Thomas, and Justice Alito all had dissenting opinions to the case. There were no concurring opinions because all who agreed, felt the same way about the case and the justification. Specifically, Chief Justice Roberts claims that the Constitution does not address same sex marriage, therefore it isn't up to the federal government.]]> 2020-11-16 20:15:38 UTC https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/929120527 nmcgee6358 https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/937438949 The ruling of this case, upheld the ruling of the Fourteenth Amendment and Due Process. It also ruled that state bans on same sex marriage was unconstitutional.  Today this law gives justification to same sex marriage nationwide. This case expanded on the Fourteenth Amendment and clarified it more.  ]]> 2020-11-18 16:16:01 UTC https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/937438949 nmcgee6358 https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/937482129 This case was most definitely Judicial Activism. Chief Justice Roberts even called out the other justices for being activist in the case. The case made a ruling on a power that wasn't technically addressed in the Constitution making the decision Judicial Activism.]]> 2020-11-18 16:22:57 UTC https://padlet.com/nmcgee6358/y0b4ieocf0y7zn7r/wish/937482129