Allahpundit reacts to the latest Windsor-inspired court ruling in a red state:
By now, if you’ve read one of these decisions, you’ve read ‘em all. Sometimes they find a violation of equal protection, sometimes
they find a violation of equal protection and of due process insofar as the right to marry is “fundamental.” Sometimes they find that gays are a “suspect class” deserving of special protection for purposes of EP analysis, sometimes they skip that part and find that bans on gay marriage have no rational basis and therefore it doesn’t matter how you classify gays. The judge in Texas, a Clinton appointee, took the latter route in both cases.
The basic point is always the same, though: Federal courts don’t see any compelling reason to restrict marriage to straights only.
Amy Davidson isolates a core rationale in the Texas ruling:
A word that appeared several times in Judge [Orlando L.] Garcia’s ruling was “dignity.” “By denying Plaintiffs Holmes and Phariss the fundamental right to marry, Texas denies their relationship the same status and dignity afforded to citizens who are permitted to marry. It also denies them the legal, social, and financial benefits of marriage that opposite-sex couples enjoy.” The laws, he continued, “demean their dignity for no legitimate reason.”
It’s great to see a word with deep origins in Catholic Christianity coming to the defense of homosexual persons. Garcia’s ruling can be read in full here. Sean Sullivan and Scott Clement put it in context:
More recent data show that Texas ≠America as a whole when it comes to gay marriage.
A December 2013 poll from The Public Religion Research Institute showed that 48 percent in Texas favored allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry legally while 49 percent opposed. That compared with a national rate of 53 percent in favor to 41 percent opposed. In short, even as attitudes nationally have shifted dramatically toward embracing gay rights during the past decade, there are plenty of states, like Texas, where opinions don’t mirror the broader attitude. What Wednesday showed is that even in these states, the laws may change.
Still, these changes will continue to encounter stiff criticism from opponents of gay marriage. Texas conservatives led by the state’s top Republican swiftly criticized Wednesday’s decision, signaling the stiff push back that is sure to surface in the GOP-dominated Lone Star State in the coming days.
But I can remember when the very idea that Texas would be evenly split on the question was incredible. Lyle Denniston looks ahead even further:
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott immediately announced plans to appeal the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Among the five federal appeals courts where appeals on this issue are or soon will be unfolding, the chances seem greatest in the Fifth Circuit that a panel of conservative judges would be ruling on the case. If that happens, it would likely increase the chances that there will be conflicting decisions on same-sex marriage bans, and that would enhance the chances that the Supreme Court would step in to decide the issue, perhaps as early as next Term.
The Dish 