There appears to be some division in the 10th Cir. panel hearing the SSM case, but over in the
9th Cir., heightened scrutiny applied to sexual orientation (applied to peremptory challenges, a tricky issue, less blatantly bad than anti-SSM laws) has basically been accepted by both sides. See
here, noting there is debate over the hows of application to juries.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your .02!