utterly null & absolutely void
By Diogenes (articles ) | Jan 25, 2004
A lawyer for Massachusetts Citizens for Marriage has filed an amicus curiae brief that makes the following concise argument for the nullity of the SJC decision on gay marriage:
The six Justices on the Supreme Judicial Court were evenly split," Pawlick wrote. "The three who opposed Marshall's opinion said the Court did not have the power or the jurisdiction to even hear the case. …
"The Chief Justice was required to recuse herself in that she had indicated many times that she was an advocate for the case and for the plaintiffs' attorney, her friend, Mary Bonauto.
"Therefore, the vote of the Justices was a tie and the decision written by the Chief Justice is a nullity. As a result, the Legislature is not required to revise its laws with respect to same-sex couples."
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!