From SCOTUS Blog...
Prop. 8 is granted on the petition question --
whether 14th Am. bars Calif. from defining marriage in traditional way.
Plus an added question: Whether the backers of Prop.. 8 have standing
in the case under Art. III.
Trying to sort this all out, it is clear that
the Court has agreed to consider the merits case in Prop. 8, because
that is what the petition presented as its question, but that it is also
going to address whether the proponents had a right to pursue their
case. If the Court were to find that the proponents did not have Art.
III standing, that is the end of the matter: there would be no review on
the merits of Proposition 8, or of the 9th CA decision striking it
In Windsor, the government petition (12-307) is
the one granted. In addition to the petition question -- whether Sec. 3
of DOMA violates equal protection under 5th Amendment, there are two
other questions: does the fact that government agreed with the 2d CA
decision deprive the Court of jurisdiction to hear and decide the case,
and whether BLAG (House GOP leaders) has Art. III standing in this case.
Trying to sort out DOMA: The case has agreed to
consider the merits issue of the constitutionality of DOMA Section 3, it
has also given itself the option of not deciding that issue. If it
finds that neither the Executive Branch could bring its appeal, and that
BLAG lacked Art. III standing, then presumably both of those petitions
would be denied. At that point, then, the Court might have to consider
whether it wants to hear another DOMA case. But that probably would not
be done in time for this term's close.
Although the Court is ruling on Prop. 8, there is nothing in the order
that would lift the 9th CA's stay. So marriage licenses in Calif. will
have to wait until this case is decided.
Arguments in gay marriage cases around Mar 25-27, decision around June 27.