US Supreme Court takes no action on same-sex marriage cases

WASHINGTON Mon Dec 3, 2012 9:38am EST

Related Topics

WASHINGTON Dec 3 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday remained silent about whether it will enter the legal fray over same-sex marriage a n d agree to hear one of several pending appeals on the issue.

The court's nine justices met in private on Friday to consider whether to review challenges to the U.S. Defense of Marriage Act, which denies federal benefits to married same-sex couples, and to California's gay marriage ban, known as Proposition 8.

In an "orders list" issued early on Monday, the court made no mention of any of the same-sex marriage cases. The court could reschedule those cases for further consideration at its weekly conference on Friday. The justices sometimes hold especially complex cases for a future conference if they want more time to figure out a course of action.

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (3)
danielmolitor wrote:
What a bunch of cowards. They have no trouble interfering in presidential elections, but can’t take on a case of basic civil rights for all Americans? Pathetic.

Dec 03, 2012 11:07am EST  --  Report as abuse
Wrinklie44 wrote:
Course of action? How about hear the cases, determine the cases on their merits in accordance with the law, and render a decision. Isn’t that what their supposed to be doing? The law maybe rocket science, but their job description is pretty basic: make judicial decisions.

Dec 03, 2012 11:33am EST  --  Report as abuse
Wrinklie44 wrote:
Course of action? How about hear the cases, determine the cases on their merits in accordance with the law, and render a decision. Isn’t that what their supposed to be doing? The law maybe rocket science, but their job description is pretty basic: make judicial decisions.

Dec 03, 2012 11:33am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.