Supreme Court defers action on same-sex marriage



Eduardo Cisneros (L) and Luke Montgomery kiss in front of a Chick-fil-A fast food restaurant in Hollywood in this August 3, 2012 photo in Hollywood, California. The US Supreme Court put off a decision on whether to take up the sensitive issue of same-sex marriage, taking no action December 3, 2012 on 10 gay marriage petitions before it. The top US court had been expected to take up the gay marriage challenges at its private conference on Friday, but as of Monday it had not added any of those cases to its docket. The court released a long list of cases that it will not hear, but made no mention of the gay marriage petitions, suggesting the justices needed more time to discuss it at their next conference December 7.AFP / Frederic J. BROWN

WASHINGTON — The US Supreme Court on Monday again put off a decision on whether to take up the sensitive issue of same-sex marriage, taking no action on 10 petitions before it but agreeing to discuss them later.

The top US court has placed the issue on the agenda for its closed-door meeting on Friday, meaning it will have featured in discussions at three consecutive meetings.

It could announce on Friday or Monday whether it will take up any of the gay marriage petitions.

The court released a long list of cases that it will not hear, but made no mention of the petitions, suggesting the justices are having trouble deciding on the matter and need further time to debate in private.

Eight of the petitions involve challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a 1996 law that denies federal benefits to married same-sex couples.

The benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples but denied to gays include inheritance rights, tax breaks, filing of joint income tax returns, and health insurance coverage.

Two other petitions deal with an Arizona state law similar to DOMA and a challenge to a 2008 California voter initiative that limited marriage to a man and a woman.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has said that same-sex marriage probably would come before the court in the session that ends in mid-2013.

If the court does take up one or more of the petitions, it will probably hear oral arguments on the constitutionality of same-sex message in March and then hand down its ruling in June.

Thousands of homosexual couples have already been legally married or will be soon in nine of the 50 US states plus the District of Columbia.

Get Inquirer updates while on the go, add us on these apps:

Inquirer Viber

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • Mang Teban

    It must be very hard for the US Supreme Court justices to decide on an immoral issue. The only support such immoral issues like abortion, divorce, and this one of same-gender marriages is from a widely-misused right of expression in the US Constitution. Other than that provision on rights of every American citizen to express his or her own belief or opinion, there is nothing more to support these immoral petitions.

    Hence, the American judicial system tolerates hearing the side of those who insist to legalize an immoral activity and depends on mere majority number of the nine SC justices. These nine justices are facing a headache. Supporters of the same-gender marriage invoke on the constitutional right of expression which has been overly abused to serve self-interests of the homosexual sector despite the majority of Americans who remains to be non-homosexuals. Satan has been successful to drive some people to believing falsely that marriage is one of convenience and not of commitment.Anyone who reads the Holy Book knows that God intended for a man and a woman to be united as one in marriage and created natural reproductive systems so that the couple can have naturally-born babies to propagate mankind in this world.Therefore, it is probably best for the US Supreme Court to deny the petition for same-gender marriages because it is, in fact, discriminatory to the majority of the American population who still prefer opposite-gender marriages which are in harmony with our Lord God’s will. But, then again, the supporters of immoral issues such as the same-gender marriages will invoke religious liberties. Funny how atheists use this approach to be recognized by society when they do not believe in a Supreme God. Opposition to this petition must insist on the Divine Order, i.e., God intended only opposite-gender marriages. Same-gender marriages, then, are not God-inspired but Satan’s.

    • Roberto

       Mang Teban, many of them are agnostic.

    • foreignerph

      “The” Lord? You mean *your* lord. There is no single shred of evidence for a god, gods, goddesses, demi or quarter-gods that are interested in our sexuality since they are supposed to be immaterial. Of course it’s OK if you like to believe in that kind of things. Just leave other people alone that are intelligent and grown-up enough not to believe in that kind of BS.

      If you are against gay marriage, for heavens sake, don’t marry a gay man then! Case closed and keep your nose out of other people’s business.

  • pololoy

    no one to blame but yourselves…
    you are asking for Divine wrath…

  • Mario

    Tama lang na wag payagan ng Korte Suprema ang pagpapakasal ng parehoong kasarian,labag yan sa mata ng tao at dios pabayaan nating ang mga bansang maka sekwalidad at di naniniwala sa utos ng dios na nasa biblia na bawal yan pero pinipilit na gayain dito sa atin. Kung nabasa ng mga readers na top stories ng  Manila Times at nakasaad na:

    CHIEF Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno on Monday courted the senior justices of the
    Supreme Court (SC) so that they will not grill her today for allegedly issuing a
    fake resolution.

    This came a day after the magistrates accused her of ordering the
    issuance of a fraudulent resolution regarding the opening of a Regional Court
    Administration Office (RCAO) in Visayas without authority from the court en

    Dapat iimpeached agad ng Kongreso si Sereno magagawa lang yan kung mapapalitan ang liderato ng Kongreso at Senado. Si Sereno walang alam sa saligang batas puro kapalpakan ginagawa gaya din ng Ombudsman pinipilit nila ang sarili nilang desisyon kahit labag sa ating saligang batas.
      Ano ginagawa ng IBP( Integrated Bar of the Philippines laban dito? Ano ginagawa niyo mga miembro ng National Press Club? kayong rally ng rally yan dapan kondenihan niyo yan ay malinaw na paglapastangan sa ating konstitusyon binababoy nila ang ating saligang batas,Kumilos kayo laban sa kinikilos ni Sereno na umaakto ng isang diktatorya sa Korte Suprema.

  • kilabot

    world agenda.
    11 nations have already fallen and legalized same-sex perversion;
    obama has fallen, so does biden. usa may not be far behind;
    unless good people do something, perversion wins;

    it has infiltrated the leadership of nations;
    redefined $sodomy as love, perversion as chic;
    claiming it’s their right, to violate the laws of nature to feed their lu$t;
    next it will be the beast they will corrupt.

    No to rhbill;
    No to same-sex marriage;
    No to man-beast union.

    • EOJ

      This is a stupid comment. love has no gender, nationality, race, or religion. Obama has nothing to do with the decision of the US supreme court. Obama has nothing to do with individual states who decided to favor same-sex marriage, idiot!

    • foreignerph

      No to retards.

  • Godfrey Buillon

    “Sexual contact was the primary mode of transmission for 286 cases, with the men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) accounting for 83 percent of them.”  YEAH GO FOR IT!

  • Godfrey Buillon

    From India: ” The incidence is higher in men who have sex with men (MSM group or gays) and transgenders. While the incidences of HIV among gays have shot up by nearly 36% in Mumbai in the past two years, the figures in the city are equally disturbing.” YEAH GO FOR IT!

  • Godfrey Buillon

    From Australia: “The data showed 72 per cent of people diagnosed from 2007-2011 were men who had sex with men. Heterosexual contact made up for only 16 per cent and only two per cent were found from injecting drug use.”  YEAH GO FOR IT!

  • Godfrey Buillon

    From France: “Obviously this is a serious illness and it is worrying that we’re still seeing a lot in men who have sex with men and this is a record year”, said Valerie Delpech, the HPA’s head of HIV surveillance, while asserting that safe sex is the best way to protect from HIV.” YEAH GO FOR IT!

  • Godfrey Buillon

    …and from Greece: A total of 1,049 new cases of HIV infection were recorded in Greece in the first 10 months of this year, including the 487 drug users. Of the others, 256 were homosexual men, while 108 caught the virus through heterosexual intercourse, the figures showed.” GOODBYE!

  • us_sixtycents

    Fourteenth Ammendment could yank DOMA like a fly so we square that out – No Problem.

    Affirmative Action is just a law that protects and gives right to individuals all access to opportunties – Done.

    Religion – Actually, you can change it anytime even without prior notice. Yould could even go Athiest route if you are so tired of people telling you how to think, how to act and conveniently decide what’s right (of course for them and you do your robot thing.. follow them while they get busy diddling little boys).

    Sexual Oritentation is built in and never been a choice. Nobody could change it. I am not going out there lecturing and telling someone how to enjoy their lives the fullest.

    Pursuit of Happiness – let people live and enjoy their lives. The rest of self righteuos – mind your own business.

    Finally, I could be a Man or a Woman but one thing is for sure, I’m straight and would only have a relationship with the opposite sex.

  • Jean Pierre Katz

    As former Vice President Dick Cheney noted in explaining why he supports civil marriage for all American couples, “freedom means freedom for everyone.” He’s right.

    What freedom is more basic and personal than the right to marry the person you love?

    If we are serious in our belief that every citizen is endowed by his or her creator with the right to pursue happiness, then how can this not include the freedom to marry? What could be more central to a person’s happiness? And alternatively, if we want a smaller, less obtrusive government, shouldn’t individuals and not politicians decide who they can marry?

    Maximizing freedom isn’t the only conservative value enhanced by allowing civil marriage for same-gender couples. It will promote stability, responsibility and commitment — family values that we often encourage in public policy. Marriage encourages people to think beyond their own needs, to create loving households, to build a support network so people can be cared for in sickness, old age and hard times.

    Those that oppose marriage equality usually do so either because they totally abhor gay existence and or because they believe the Bible told them so.

    But the Supreme Court is not about deciding if G-d or Satan would approve of anything.

    Religious sentiments and or beliefs and prejudice should not enter into the debate.

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94


editors' picks



latest videos