RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

04/22/2014

NOM fails to trip up Oregon marriage case

by Jeremy Hooper

Ever since D.C.-based pro-discrimination special interest group NOM stepped in with a bid to intervene in the court case against Oregon's discriminatory marriage ban, clued-in politicos have speculated that NOM was trying to delay the case so that it might force a ballot fight instead. Since the pro-equality side is open to that possibility, if we are unable to achieve our rights through the court, NOM's thinking is that if that process moves forward (which it would in the case of a drawn out legal fight), they will be able to convince enough interested parties—the judge, Oregon citizens, the media, etc.—to pressure the judge to let the process play out through an election day popularity contest instead of through a scrutinizing court.

Fortunately, the judge dealt NOM a major blow this afternoon:

Nom-Denied-300X237Moments ago, Judge Michael McShane denied the National Organization for Marriage’s attempt to delay tomorrow’s scheduled oral arguments in federal lawsuit challenging Oregon’s marriage ban.
...
With Judge McShane’s ruling today, oral arguments will proceed as scheduled tomorrow afternoon at the Federal Courthouse in Eugene. However, the judge will consider NOM’s motion to intervene in the case and has scheduled oral arguments on that issue for May 14th. If the motion to intervene is accepted, Judge McShane would then schedule a second briefing schedule on summary judgement or move the case to trial.
FULL:
BREAKING: Federal judge denies NOM’s attempt to delay oral arguments [OR United]

While that May 14 thing might sound like a still-open door, I'd put NOM's chances there at slim-to-[the number of wins NOM has banked since election night 2012] (aka none). NOM didn't jump in until the last minute, NOM has no real reason to jump into this state's matter at all, and NOM likely doesn't have standing. It's likely the judge is just letting NOM have its say, in order to quell the "ACTIVIST COURTS DIDN'T LET US HAVE OUR WAY SO WE'RE THE VICTIMS!!!" headlines that would come if he completely shut them out (and will still probably come, even though he didn't).

I'm confident that what we're witnessing here is yet another complete and utter NOM failure. That's happening so often these days, it's almost gotten stale. Almost.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails