Circuit Rejects Suit Over City's Criticism of Vatican

[Beau_Ouiville]

"(CN) - In a fractured 8-3 ruling Friday, the 9th Circuit rejected a lawsuit filed by Catholics over San Francisco’s non-binding resolution denouncing the Vatican’s stance on gay adoptions.
The federal appeals court voted 8-3 to uphold dismissal of a lawsuit filed by the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights and two local residents after the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a non-binding resolution urging Catholic charities to allow same-sex adoption…
“In the end … the resolution carries no legal effect and, perhaps more importantly, does not apply to Plaintiffs,” Judge Susan Graber wrote, joined by Judges Pamela Rymer, Michael Daly Hawkins and Margaret McKeown, and Chief Judge Alex Kozinski. "

courthousenews.com/2010/10/25/Rulings_&_Appeals.htm#31346

No wonder the suit was dismissed. You gotta have a horse in the race to sue.

 

[pprimeau1976]

"(CN) - In a fractured 8-3 ruling Friday, the 9th Circuit rejected a lawsuit filed by Catholics over San Francisco’s non-binding resolution denouncing the Vatican’s stance on gay adoptions.
The federal appeals court voted 8-3 to uphold dismissal of a lawsuit filed by the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights and two local residents after the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a non-binding resolution urging Catholic charities to allow same-sex adoption…
“In the end … the resolution carries no legal effect and, perhaps more importantly, does not apply to Plaintiffs,” Judge Susan Graber wrote, joined by Judges Pamela Rymer, Michael Daly Hawkins and Margaret McKeown, and Chief Judge Alex Kozinski. "

courthousenews.com/2010/10/25/Rulings_&_Appeals.htm#31346

No wonder the suit was dismissed. You gotta have a horse in the race to sue.

Not only that, I’ll even venture to say that this doesn’t even violate the establishment clause:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

Given that the San Francisco BoS never established a religion, nor did their resolutions prohibit anyone’s free exercise of Catholicism, it’s really a weak case.

I think that if they tried something like taxing institutions that, in their view, promote intolerance, then a case can be made.

 

[estesbob]

"(CN) - In a fractured 8-3 ruling Friday, the 9th Circuit rejected a lawsuit filed by Catholics over San Francisco’s non-binding resolution denouncing the Vatican’s stance on gay adoptions.
The federal appeals court voted 8-3 to uphold dismissal of a lawsuit filed by the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights and two local residents after the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a non-binding resolution urging Catholic charities to allow same-sex adoption…
“In the end … the resolution carries no legal effect and, perhaps more importantly, does not apply to Plaintiffs,” Judge Susan Graber wrote, joined by Judges Pamela Rymer, Michael Daly Hawkins and Margaret McKeown, and Chief Judge Alex Kozinski. "

courthousenews.com/2010/10/25/Rulings_&_Appeals.htm#31346

No wonder the suit was dismissed. You gotta have a horse in the race to sue.

I think the San Francisco Board of Supervisors has every right to make complete fools out of themselves.