Premature emancipation

The petition to legalize same-sex marriages is before the Supreme Court and is in danger of being booted out. Worse, the SC may not rule on the preliminary aspects, but on its merits. And because of how ill-prepared the petition is, this ruling could set a precedent making it a thousand times even harder to win the next time.

The young lawyer who filed this petition either forgot or deliberately disregarded basic procedural rules when he filed the case. Rules that every Law student is taught from the early years in Law school.

For example, the rule of the “real party in interest,” which means before anyone can file a lawsuit, that person must be the affected party. So a person cannot complain about being unable to marry a man if he hasn’t tried to marry a man.

Yet that is exactly what petitioner did. He didn’t even have a husband in mind when he filed. For all the Justices know, he might never find a man to propose to. So how could he be affected by the current laws in place? All he had was a theoretical injury, a maybe, if ever.

After realizing this faux pas, petitioner tried to introduce other same-sex couples as intervenors or co-petitioners, but we will see if this strategy pays. One would have to throw themselves at the mercy of the justices for them to overlook this blunder.

One other basic rule is that the SC does not conduct trial proceedings. That is, it doesn’t hear different competing versions of what the facts are and then try to determine the real ones. For anyone offering still-disputed facts, the rule is to go to a lower court where a judge can observe and listen to witnesses and then make judgment calls about their honesty.

But the petitioner also forgot this, so strike two.

It would be acceptable for me if the court dismisses the case for these procedural grounds. But what if the justices decide to pen thoughts damaging to the cause? Any hint of doubt or even criticism of the ability of gay people to marry that finds its way into the decision will be seized upon by anti-gay marriage factions, and then used to further retard the movement.

The young lawyers plead their inexperience and youth as excuses. But really, is this where the gay movement wants to be? Instead of preparing the best witnesses, the most compelling arguments, and the most brilliant strategies, it’s begging?

The petitioners said that whatever happens, this petition is already a victory because it will cause ripples or start the conversation about gay marriage. Eye roll. Honey, not to be dismissive, but this conversation started even before you were born.

Is this a case of millennial eagerness to succeed early in life? Or is this a case of a lawyer not doing his homework? (At this point I will forego the less forgiving theories, although I am sorely tempted to.)

June is Pride month. However, with defeat in sight, pride may not come from this corner.