Two More Major Victories: How Scalia Predicted The Marriage Equality Juggernaut

scaliagal_8Just one day shy of anniversary of the Supreme Court ruling that struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, two more courts handed down major victories for marriage equality. A U.S. District Court of Appeals voted 2-1 to uphold the lower court decision striking down Utah’s marriage ban. But the ruling is even more far reaching. It applies to all the states covered by the circuit: Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah and Wyoming.  The ruling is on hold while Utah appeals, so the changes won’t be immediate, unfortunately.

Meanwhile, in just slightly less conservative Indiana, a federal judge there struck down that state’s marriage ban. However, Judge Richard Young did not issue a stay with his ruling, so marriages began immediately (although a few counties dragged their heels to “review” the ruling).

The question at this point is whether marriage equality can ever lose in court. After a full year of court rulings, there has yet to be a single case where opponents have prevailed. In states that would seem to be among the least likely venues for change, like Utah, marriage equality has been made legal (at least temporarily).

Moreover, the backlash against marriage equality has never emerged. Of course, the dead-enders, like NOM, are fulminating, but even hard-core conservatives are either lackluster in their defense of traditional marriage (Utah Gov. Gary Herbert says the ruling brings the case closer to “some finality,” which isn’t exactly an over-my-dead-body statement) or have simply given up, like Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett.

Who could have predicted that this would happen? As it turns out, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia did.

With amazing prescience, Scalia outlined just this turn of events when writing his scathing dissent in the DOMA case. In essence, he called the majority out for being disingenuous in saying the original ruling still left marriage laws up to the states. (It’s clear now the majority were afraid of getting too far out in front, so they just kicked the can down the road.)

“It takes real cheek for today’s majority to assure us, as it is going out the door, that a constitutional requirement to give formal recognition to same-sex marriage is not at issue here,” Scalia wrote. “I promise you this: The only thing that will ‘confine’ the Court’s holding is its sense of what it can get away with.”

Or what other courts can get away with. And Scalia saw that coming as well. “The real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow,” Scalia wrote, “is that DOMA is motivated by ‘bare . . . desire to harm’ couples in same-sex marriages. How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.”

Indeed, that has been the conclusion that every court has reached so far.

Scalia probably takes no comfort in being right. He probably hates that several courts have actually quoted his dissent to justify striking down marriage bans as a kind of legalistic bear hug. One can only imagine what he will say when he writes his opinion–most likely another dissent–when marriage equality comes back before the Supreme Court. (The Utah decision looks like it could be the one the justices will face.) One thing is for certain, though: pay close attention to where Scalia says things are heading. So far, he’s been right on the money.


Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #politics #antoninscalia #doma(defenseofmarriageact) stories and more


  • 1EqualityUSA

    Every vote counts. Even if Republicans say out loud that they support equality (now), the Supreme Court Justices that the Republicans appoint are like Scalia, dissenting, even though it is discriminatory. This fight has made me lose faith in our system. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, lovely as she is, is going to leave sometime in the near future and a Republican in the White House would allow another hater to slither onto the bench for a lifetime appointment! The Justices that the Republicans appointed allowed Citizens United to pass and gutted the Voter Rights Act, essentially making it easier for Republicans to buy elections, cheat voters, and muscle their way into power. The Supreme Court justices that the Republicans appointed are tapped by their political ties and the religious ties and that is disgraceful. Every vote counts.

  • Mezaien

    Scalia, is another body fat ass Christian! is he white?.

  • James Hart

    Scalia made this case long before even the DOMA ruling. He said years ago in his dissent in the case involving Texas’ anti-sodomy law that he could foresee a day when gay marriage was permitted if anti-sodomy laws were struck down.

  • James Hart

    @Mezaien: Once again, a very unintelligent statement from you. You’re batting a 1000. Scalia does have a fat ass, but so does Barney Frank and Harvey Fierstein. So, what does his weight have anything to do with his faulty reasoning? Or his skin color?

  • yousir75

    The 2-1 ruling came a U.S. Court of Appeals, the 10th Circuit. It is an appellate court, not a trial court such as a U.S. District Court. Queerty, you should correct the error in your article.

  • Boytoy

    Marriage equality will happen nationwide within the decade.

  • 1EqualityUSA

    After the Hobby Lobby and the Union harming decisions this week, need there be any further reiteration of how important it is to have a Democrat appointing the next Supreme Court Justice? Every vote counts!

Comments are closed.