Reader comments · US: California Supreme Court refuses to halt resume of same-sex marriages · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


US: California Supreme Court refuses to halt resume of same-sex marriages

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. bobbleobble 15 Jul 2013, 11:51pm

    The article isn’t clear. The California Supreme Court is still considering Project H8’s (or whatever the group’s name is) petition. All they have done is to refuse to stop marriage licences being granted whilst they consider the petition.

    I think this is a good sign but there is still a way to go until this is resolved.

    1. The decision was unanimous. The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution prevents the CA Supreme Court from overruling or modifying Judge Vaughn Walker’s Federal Court decision.

      1. bobbleobble 16 Jul 2013, 8:02pm

        The decision may have been unanimous not to stop same sex marriages for the moment but they haven’t dismissed the petition. They are deliberating it and have called for submissions. They expect to reach a decision by some time in August.

        They aren’t actually asking the court to overrule Walker. Their argument is that according to the California State Constitution, a federal judge’s verdict can only be applied once it’s confirmed by an appellate court. Since the appeal court’s decision supporting Walker’s decision was vacated and therefore never happened, they are arguing that stopping the enforcement of Proposition 8 goes against California State Law.

        They are also arguing that even if that isn’t the case, Walker’s decision only applies to either the parties named in the law suit or the counties in which they live and not actually statewide.

        So the Supreme Court of California is still considering the petition and could still call a halt to SSM in the future.

  2. why do you keep treating the verb “resume” like a noun?

    the word you are looking for is “resumption”. The California Supreme Court Refuses to Halt (the) Resumption of Same-Sex Marriages.

    How hard was that?

    “Resume” is a verb. California resumes the distribution of marriage licenses.

    Amazing that you and your commentators are so prissy about Americanisms and are such total little bitches about them, and yet you can’t even be bothered to use the noun form of a word?

    1. Or bad grammar like yours when you stick a question mark at the end of a sentence that isn’t even a question.

      1. Really?
        I’m not writing a blog.
        I don’t have the luxury of time to dissect every word I write when commenting on a blog post.

        If you think that my question mark is a more egregious error than the dreadful grammar in the article in question, then you prove without a doubt that you have absolutely no right whatsoever to be correcting anyone else’s grammar.

        1. I’m with Mikey, too. PN has the greater responsibilty. ‘resume’ used this way is as illiterate as that other spurious gem ‘invite’ instead of ‘invitation’, and my own personal pet hate; ‘impact’ used as a transitive verb and even then without its preposition!

      2. Midnighter 16 Jul 2013, 7:40am

        I’m with Mikey on this point. A casual forum post is generally considered a far more casual communication than a posted article.

        For the sake of argument, even your short sentence could be picked apart. You’ve used a non-restrictive clause at the end which should be preceded by a comma and used “that” instead of “which”.

        I would also tend to disagree with your quibble over the question mark; the clause which contains the question is separated from the reported speech portion by a comma.

        None of this really matters to me if I can understand you, since the aim here is casual communication and doesn’t – in my view – need to be subject to the same scrutiny as an article, as Mikey has already pointed out.

        As a free service I’m not inclined to overly scrutinise the quality of the grammar of PN articles, however it may be considered a sign that less care has been invested, which in turn may in turn raise questions about the overall factual accuracy of a piece.

  3. PN – please correct your headline – resume means a statement summarising a project, it doesn’t mean To resume – surely you mean “US: The Supreme Court of California refuses to halt the resumption of same-sex marriages”.

    Your articles are a hugely valuable source of information which I for one thoroughly enjoy reading but occasionally are spoilt by sloppy headlines which discourage the reader from actually going on to read the article in question!.

    1. The writer of this particular article is noteable for the poor quality of his writing.

  4. Resumption please – this website and article is meant to be comprehensible to a world-wide audience – don’t take for granted that everyone can speak US slang or is a native speaker.

  5. Who wrote that headline?

    Is the person even literate?

    Judging by the author of said article I think the answer is a resounding ‘no’.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.