I know this doesn’t mean anything. Not a thing. I’d be crazy to read anything into this. Absolutely batty, right?
The fact that Roberts is hosting his lesbian cousin in the courtroom for the hearing on Prop 8 is absolutely nothing to worry about, right?
And it means nothing that his lesbian cousin has actively pushed for gay marriage, right? This is just Matt being crazy, right?
The LA Times reports:
Jean Podrasky, 48, a lesbian who wants to marry her partner, will be at Tuesday’s U.S. Supreme Court hearing on Proposition 8 in seating reserved for family members and guests of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.
“I am so excited,” said Podrasky, an accountant and the first cousin of the chief justice on his mother’s side. “I feel quite honored and overwhelmed.”
Roberts is a conservative appointed by President George W. Bush in 2005. Podrasky, who is more liberal, said she rooted for his nomination to be approved by the U.S. Senate. “He is family,” she said.
Podrasky lives in San Francisco and usually sees Roberts only on family occasions. His mother is her godmother, whom she adores. She said Roberts knows she is gay and introduced her along with other relatives during his Senate confirmation hearing. She hopes he will meet her partner of four years, Grace Fasano, during their Washington visit. The couple flew to Washington on Sunday.
“He is a smart man,” she said. “He is a good man. I believe he sees where the tide is going. I do trust him. I absolutely trust that he will go in a good direction.”
Podrasky obtained the highly coveted courtroom seats by emailing Roberts’ sister, Peggy Roberts, and then going through his secretary. Roberts knows she is attending, she said. She, her partner, her sister and her niece will attend Tuesday’s arguments on Proposition 8. On Wednesday, her father will take her niece’s place for the hearing on the challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act.
Although Podrasky has no personal knowledge of her cousin’s views on same-sex marriage, she expects the court will overturn the 2008 ballot initiative, leaving her free to marry Fasano.
I actually think that the Court is not going to “Roe” us on the issue of gay marriage. I actually think that the court will believe that states are beginning to overturn marriage all on their own. But what do I know? I thought the Roberts court would find Obamacare illegal.
There’s two options here:
1 – He fully intends to overturn Prop 8
2 – He’s not going to overturn it but he wants people to know he’s not a hater.
I wouldn’t bet on the second option.
March 25, 2013 at 10:38 pm
Thank You, Margaret
Read the Carolyn Moynihan article.
EXCELLENT ARTICLE!!!…….A real must read!!!
Supreme Court is going to be opening nothing but cans of worms!!!…………..We are the losers. It has already been mucked up and taken too far. The genie will never go back onto the bottle!!!!!..
March 25, 2013 at 11:38 pm
Justice Roberts could be inviting her for a different, double-pronged reason: First, so that she can see and hear for herself what the arguments are, and how the discourse on both sides, as well as from he Justices, goes; and Second, IN CASE her side loses, Justice Roberts can speak with her & other family members later… It was so very complex….I had to vote as I did because LEGALLY________ I wanted my niece to see she Court's very difficult work in action, etc.
If the niece is a reasonable person, then I think she would understand her uncle's efforts to genuinely include her; and at the same time, his need (under pain of the highest legal body in the land!) to vote according to the Constitution as he best understands it.
I say, please give Justice Roberts the benefit of the doubt!
March 25, 2013 at 11:43 pm
"Only a living thing can swim upstream" G.K. Chesterton
March 26, 2013 at 12:20 am
I think it will be a variant of 2 – he won't overturn it directly, but he WILL do it effectively.
Precedent is to always give lip service to the Constitution, while providing rationale that lets the government expand as desired.
March 26, 2013 at 1:12 am
Why should CJ Roberts recuse himself? In 2013, who doesn't have a gay or lesbian cousin?
March 26, 2013 at 2:43 am
All that really changes for a faithful Catholic is the contrast gets more stark. I expect our numbers to decrease, but our fidelity to increase. Why? Because no one is going to be Catholic for the perks when it's a hate crime to merely exist.
March 26, 2013 at 4:07 am
even if same-sex marriage/union be civilly recognized through civil courts/'churches', still it will never make a family at all to the fullest extent.
March 26, 2013 at 3:44 pm
Time of pray. Let's offer up masses, say the rosary, the short miraculous medal prayer, and the prayer to St. Joseph!
March 26, 2013 at 4:37 pm
In those days there is no king in Israel; each doth that which is right in his own eyes.
March 26, 2013 at 7:31 pm
Any law which would purport to give recognition or status to a relationship based on an intrinsic evil is invalid, and void ab initio, for being irrational, against the Natural Law, and inimical to the individual and common good. If the Supreme Court of the State of California were to find for homosexual relationships requiring public sanction and the status of marriage, the Court would be in error.
March 27, 2013 at 8:51 am
are they going to delete the words husband and wife? Crazy world. Even a male dog and a male dog know their natural limits.