AI: Homos at SCOTUS


As I’m sure many (most? all?) are aware, Tuesday and Wednesday saw some arguments about the rights of us homosessuals at SCOTUS (the Supreme Court of the United States). There was much doom-and-gloom circulating around the net after Tuesday’s arguments about Hollingsworth v. Perry (the Prop 8 case), while the oral arguments on Wednesday in United States v. Windsor (the DOMA case) seemed to leave a sweeter taste in many pro-equality people’s mouths.

Did you follow the oral arguments? What were some of the highlights in your view? What were some arguments that weren’t brought up that you wish had been? What were some arguments that you thought were great? What were some arguments that made your head assplode?

The Afternoon Inqueery (or AI) is a question posed to you, the Queereka community. Look for it every Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday at 3pm ET.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest


  1. Scalia demonstrated breathtaking ignorance, and I now want a Ginsberg photo for my house.

    My favorite exchange in the Prop 8 case was Sotomayor trying to get through to the defense of prop 8 lawyer that a mixed gendered couple 55+ would be very unlikely to have children. The lawyer seemed fixated on male fertility, unable to comprehend that it takes two people. Like, somehow, sperm just magically makes people.

    Crystallized the error in thinking of the pro-Prop 8 people. There’s parts of reality they are just completely blind to.

  2. I followed it quite a bit, in fact probably more than was healthy as it left me about ready to scream for two days.

    As someone who is queer and in an OSM I was insulted on so many levels. The combination of BS about the LGBTQ population and the claims that my marriage was only valid as a blessing from god or a service for my child were almost too much for me to handle. I had to fight my own road rage on the way home.

Leave a Comment

This div height required for enabling the sticky sidebar