The Defense of Marriage Act will be taken down, but today is not that day. In a ruling that appears to punt the ball back to the state legislature, the state Supreme Court today upheld Washington's law that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. For shame.

From Yesterday:

The case was an appeal from two lawsuits, one in King County and one in Thurston County, filed by 19 same-sex couples raising the momentous social question of who can marry.

Justices must decide the fate of state's 1998 Defense of Marriage Act. The law, passed by an overwhelming majority of lawmakers over Gov. Gary Locke's veto, defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

Superior Court judges in both counties struck down the law banning same-sex marriage as unconstitutional in 2004.

King County Judge William Downing ruled that there's no logical way that banning same-sex marriage encourages procreation -- a similar position taken by courts in Massachusetts, the only state that now allows same-sex couples to marry.

Downing said the couples had a fundamental right to wed, and Thurston County Judge Richard Hicks reached the same conclusion. [P-I]

Ridiculous, but at least Democratic incumbents and challengers won't have hell to pay for the "activist judges" in their pockets come November.

A bit more breaking news this afternoon, in Justice Robert's first loss, the Supreme Court has upheld Oregon's assisted suicide law. The 6-3 decision failed as Attorney General John Ashcroft attempted to steamroll it with federal drug law.

Further Reading
Status of assisted suicide law initiatives in other states. (SeaTimes)

Let us hope for the best. Dubya has chosen Harriet E. Miers to succeed Sandra Day O'Connor to be the third woman ever appointed to the Supreme Court.

Of course, Miers has never been a judge and has never held public office (edit: she was an elected member of the city council in Dallas for three years). And, while that may seem surprising to many Americans, it's not that uncommon in the history of the Supreme Court.

So, all we have to go off in making a judgment about Miers is the limited amount of what has been written about her and the fact that she once gave money to Al Gore.

But, hey. Maybe she's really intelligent and has great insight. Maybe David Frum, a former speech writer for Dubya, got to know Miers well in the first Dubya Administration and maybe the National Review columnist can bring us insight into the genius of Harriet E. Miers.

David Frum: 'Justice Miers?' In the White House that hero worshipped the president, Miers was distinguished by the intensity of her zeal: She once told me that the president was the most brilliant man she had ever met.

What? Who does she hang out with on the weekends? George W. Bush is the most brilliant man she has ever met? Roberts will have her fetching tea for the rest of the justices in a weeks time.

The following conversation is about to happen in the halls of the Supreme Court of the United States:

Justice Thomas: A dumbass says what?
Justice Miers: What?
Justice Thomas: A dumbass says what?
Justice Miers: What?
Justice Thomas: A dumbass says what?
Justice Miers: What?
Justice Souter: Exactly
(Ginsburg and Stevens hi-five)

Hey are y'all listening to or watching the Roberts Supreme Court confirmation hearings? You totally should be. They are fucking fascinating. Plus if Roberts is confirmed (heh heh, "if"), he will be only the 17th Chief Justice on the Supreme Court. It's kind of an amazing thing.

First of all there were the opening remarks yesterday by all 300 (okay, I think it's like 18-- but some of them are windy) Senate Judiciary Committee members, which put together became sort of an old fashioned warfare-style (you know, where one line of Union soldiers faced a line of Confederate soldiers, they shot on cue, and broke for lunch) debate between Republicans and Democrats. The Dems want Roberts to answer some damn questions, and the Reps want Roberts to shut up and be confirmed already. This is a broad generalization.

Then they are also having firing-line arguments about "judicial activism" and "constitutional constructionism." Really both the Ds and the Rs are a little pissed about the Supremes and other courts supposedly making laws from the bench (remember the private property ruling that had everyone from every side in an undie bunch of doom?)-- I guess we all get a little territorial from time to time. And then, the hot new topic in constitutional law (hot!!) is whether the Constitution can be interpreted or if it never fucking changes (that constructionist thing)-- generally Big D leans to the side of being able to interpret the constitution based on the way things are now... which basically means that Dems believe full civil rights extend to gay people (heavens no!!).

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist died Saturday evening at his home in suburban Virginia, said Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg.

Edit!! Dude. Bush de-nominated John Roberts as Miss Sandra's replacement, and re-nominated him as the new Chief Justice... and many pundit-types are saying that Roberts was the Bush pick to replace Rehnquist all along.

So what do you guys think??? Is this young whippersnapper the right guy to head the Supreme Court? Who will Bush nominate to the other open seat? What effect will all of this have on the court? Do you think the other justices are jealous that they don't get to be Chief??

Ann Coulter has just called Bush Supreme Court nominee John Roberts a "Souter in Roberts' clothing." Lack of understanding of literary allusion aside I think she may have a point. Conservatives tend to scream conspiracy when looking at recent history and the stream of judges that have become disappointingly unbiased and that were nominated by Republican Presidents.

To me this simply means three things:

1. Political ideologues of either party are going to be disappointed with any important individual that doesn't face reelection.
2. Judges can't be "reliable" in the dirty power-grubbin' ways of Washington
3. Roberts might not be too bad. (I was expecting so much worse.)

(Attempt to write complete post referencing Ann Coulter without linking to this site failed miserably.)

LAST CHANCE TO ENTER!!! BUSH ANNOUNCES COURT NOMINEE TONIGHT!!!

Whatever happens with the Supreme Court nomination battle that is about to ensue, it's going to happen fast. Here are some things you can do right now:

• If you have a cell phone, sign up for People at the American Way's Mass Immediate Response site. This way, you'll be able to receive text message action items instantly as events break. (If you signed up during the nuclear option fight, you'll need to re-sign up.)
  
• Also sign up with the Save the Court, another PFAW website devoted specifically to this issue.
  
• Recruit friends and family members to the cause.
  
• Write to the President, telling him he should choose a consensus candidate to replace O'Connor.
  

Supreme Court Justice David Souter's neighbor, Logan Darrow Clements the CEO of Freestar Media (warning- lame website), has proposed using his town's newly invigorated eminent domain to seize Souter's house and turn it into a hotel. AP story here.

'The justification for such an eminent domain action is that our hotel will better serve the public interest as it will bring in economic development and higher tax revenue to Weare,' Logan Darrow Clements of California wrote in a letter faxed to town officials in Weare on Tuesday.

Souter, a longtime Weare resident, joined in the 5-4 court decision allowing governments to seize private property from one owner and turn it over to another if doing so would benefit a community.

Cheeky move, you've got to give him that.

The nuclear option will go down tomorrow. Here is what you can do:

1. Sign up for text message alerts on your cell phone with People for the American Way. This way, you'll know instantly when we need to take action and what you need to do. www.pfaw.org

2. Regionalization is becoming increasingly important - elected officials always respond more eagerly to their constituents, and good local media coverage is key. BlogPAC (www.blogpac.org) is helping to organize state-by-state efforts, so if you haven't yet signed up there, do so by clicking here. If you have a blog of your own, be sure to input that in the appropriate field. (Non-bloggers should sign up as well.)

3. MoveOn PAC is organizing citizen filibusters - along the lines of the tremendously successful Princeton filibuster - tomorrow at noon. Click on over to their site to find a location near you: http://www.moveonpac.org/event/citizenfilibusters/

If you go, be sure to take a digital camera or a camcorder and post pics or videos online when you get home. Thanks to inflation, pictures are worth even more than 1,000 words these days.

4. When things really, finally go down, everyone needs to be able to contact as many people as fast as possible. We need people to hear our unfiltered message from friends and family and co-workers and neighbors before they hear the sterile and misleading he-said/she-said version on the news. So people need to pull together email addresses for everyone they know before it happens so that our message can immediately spread virally.

Note: I will pull this off the front page once we get through the fight. For more info see Dr.Action's post on Dailykos.com:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/5/23/125913/061

So, by all accounts it looks like the fight for minority rights in the Senate is set up for tomorrow. Frist is saying he wants to bring up the same old bigots for another turn on the dance floor, knowing full well that the Senators of conscience (aka the Dems) will be forced into a brawl. Think "The Jets" in West Side Story, snaps and all.

So, the question many of us are probably asking ourselves, what can we do? Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell are D's, so what can we do to influence this debate? Write some wavering Republican Senator a letter?

Here's what you do, go to: http://democrats.org/specialreports/nuclear_option/index.html

You can send some emails, check out their new flash video, listen to Harry Reid tell it like it is.

But most importantly, write Howard Dean a check. 5 bucks, 50 bucks or 500 bucks, it doesn't matter. Just show them that we can be relied on, that the solid blue states are wellsprings of national support, that they can stand up for something and we'll be right there behind them.

You're not alone.

The Schaivo case has sparked a hot debate in this country: the merit and legitimacy of the federal judiciary. Or more attractively "judicial tyranny" as fringe conservatives, sadly overrepresented in the media, prefer to use. Unfortunately, saintly Tom DeLay and other high-ranking nuts in the Legislature fall into these ranks. Such emotive language being popular amongst the herd, it will be interesting to see how this plays out in the coming months.

Buckle your Amendments, things look to get bumpy.

And what will the consequences be for the nation?

I was recently talking with one of my friends and found that they didn't know a whole lot about an important issue sitting on the horizon. An issue that may be as radical and have as far reaching and dramatic consequence as the Bush Doctrine and the invasion of Iraq. For her benefit, and so that all of us will be aware if the Republicans choose to exercise the option, I thought I would write a brief summary of the "Nuclear Option" for the blog.

As most of you probably know, the Democrats in the Senate have been the last line of defense and a major speed bump against the Republicans' most extreme proposals, especially when it comes to the appointment of radical federal court judges. The Democrats have been able to do this, even though they don't make up the majority, through skillful use of the filibuster, a time honored parliamentary tactic that has been a part of the American political system, used for both liberal and conservative causes, since the 1850's

Behold... the face of the future Chief Justice of the Supreme Court:

An ugly future, eh?

And, guess what... he is pissed that we can no longer execute the kids.

Scaila railed against the the court's recent ruling to outlaw the juvenile death penalty in a recent speaking engagement, deploring the courts "evolving notions of decency" as the reason for the ruling.

Okay, so this guy is AGAINST decency? Let's put him at the head of the FCC! We can have all the towel drops and wardrobe malfunctions we want! Desperate Housewives will be... like.. 10 times better. (Note: 10 times 0 still equals zero).

In other news:

Scalia will pass his time by eating the flesh of the living INSTEAD of executing juveniles on the weekends.