Supreme Court to take up same-sex marriage
The Supreme Court agreed today to take up the explosive issue of same-sex marriage, thrusting itself into a policy debate that has divided federal and state governments and courts, as well as voters in nearly 40 states.
The high court’s long-awaited decisions to hear challenges to the federal Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage moves the issue to the top of the national agenda following a year in which advocates scored major legal and political victories.
Lawmakers led astray by the early confusion over the Supreme Court’s ruling to uphold President Obama’s health care law.
These tweets, then deleted, were recorded by Politwoops.
It should be pretty clear by now that I didn’t do this because it’s good politics. I did it because I believed it was good for the country.
Links to coverage of the Supreme Court ruling
The Supreme Court today handed President Obama a major election-year victory in upholding his health care law.
Here are some links to some of the best coverage out there.
Our David Jackson writes: “The announcement will have a major impact on the nation’s health care system, the actions of both federal and state governments, and the course of the November presidential and congressional elections.”
Here’s the PDF of the full ruling and an interactive timeline of the health care law.
USA TODAY’s Richard Wolf explains the ruling from in front of the Supreme Court building.
CNN got the ruling very wrong at first, reporting that the individual mandate had been struck down. Here’s a Storify of some of the reaction. AP then sent a memo to its employees asking them not to gloat.
Twitter reports that the number of tweets peaked at 13,000 per minute at 10:17 a.m. ET.
The New York Times has a smart take on what the decision means for Chief Justice John Roberts’ legacy.
“To those on the left who viewed him as an ideologue eager to pull the court rightward in a political fashion, this will now begin a re-examination of his style and legacy as it will for those on the right who considered the law unconstitutional and relied on him to make that point,” Ethan Bronner writes.
(Photo by Kaveh Rezaiei)
Because the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness.
Five Justices agreed that the penalty that someone must pay if he refuses to buy insurance is a kind of tax that Congress can impose using its taxing power. That is all that matters.
For live coverage of today’s Supreme Court decision on President Obama’s health care law:
Follow USA TODAY reporter Aamer Madhani on Twitter
Live video from CSPAN: http://cs.pn/KOLENn
Live coverage from SCOTUSblog: http://bit.ly/M7H7WG
(Photo by Patty Michalski, USA TODAY)
