Interesting but needed to be done. I think the underlying reason for taking on Prop 8 is the precedents that could be set regarding states rights. A voter referendum that essentially bars a gov't granted right to a segment of society could set a huge precedent if allowed to go through. It could be used for years to come to support legalization of marijuana or any vice by referendum or even enslavement of a population based on mob rule. Personally, I don't agree with Prop 8 and find the idea vile, but I also do not like the stance the 9th Circuit Court took. I find the fact they are overturned so frequently to be a shining example of judicial activism. But again, I don't support the underlying law they abolished.

DOMA is an example of a law that should never be passed by a federal gov't and is a living example of the failure of a federal system. Such a polarizing law that really has no concensus in terms of a "general welfare" benefit should be voided. However, it does appear to be a redundancy of laws. States are not required to recipricate licenses on anything, so why marriage. I guess the details come in the form of accepting some licenses but not others. Honestly I do not know enough about the law as I have no skin in the game and have other issues I would rather deal with then culture war issues.

With that said, the majority of those who disagree with DOMA, probably supported Obamacare, and guess what, I could see this one passing for much the same reason Obamacare did. Not because of the merits of the constitution, but like Roberts stated "We do not consider whether the Act embodies sound policies. That judgment is entrusted to the Nation's elected leaders. We ask only whether Congress has the power under the Constitution to enact the challenged provisions."

Based on this precedence, I could see DOMA passing. I hope not, but we'll see. It would be poetic justice if the group that seemed to support judicial tyranny for something they wished are screwed by similar judicial tyranny? In fact, I have even heard that that was the Roberts Endgame. Legitimize the court with a controversial position taken by his biggest critics on the left on an issue that was inevitable so that he could would legitimacy to attack issues that he politically supports down the road.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden