‘Supreme Court declared DOMA to be unconstitutional, hurrah!’ links

Ellen DeGeneres Portia DeRossi

The Supreme Court (via an opinion by Justice Kennedy) held that the Federal Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional & dismissed the Prop. 8 appeal. [Gawker]
Nicole Richie‘s web series is surprisingly entertaining. [LaineyGossip]
Derek Jeter turns 39. Happy birthday, male slut! [Dlisted]
Ryan Reynolds & Blake Lively go on a date in Barcelona. [Pop Sugar]
Daft Punk outsold Kanye West‘s Yeezus. HA. [Buzzfeed]
Bill Murray‘s best quotes on acting & fame are awesome. [Pajiba]
Kourtney Kardashian pulls off a pencil skirt quite well. [A Socialite Life]
AnnaSophia Robb is so pretty, but she’s pretty boring too. [Go Fug Yourself]
Chris Brown was formally charged with a hit-and-run. [Evil Beet]
Hailey Baldwin is really trying to happen in a bikini. [The Blemish]
Nina Agdal‘s boobs did a photoshoot. She was there too. [Celebslam]
Cameron Diaz gives the finger & Kate Upton likes it. [IDLYITW]
Emily Blunt looks fantastic in tight workout pants. Lucky bitch. [Popoholic]
Kate Walsh grabs an on-set snack in a hurry. [I'm Not Obsessed]
Vanessa Lachey has had it with postpartum body standards. [Celebrity Baby Scoop]
Kim Zolciak reveals she’s pregnant with her fifth baby. [Reality Tea]
Lena Dunham is on the prowl again while filming “Girls.” [Amy Grindhouse]

Matt Bomer

Jim Parsons

Cynthia Nixon

Neil Patrick Harris

Photos courtesy of WENN

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

94 Responses to “‘Supreme Court declared DOMA to be unconstitutional, hurrah!’ links”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. marie says:

    good deal! (and seriously all you had to post was the photo of Matt Bomer-so ridiculously HOT)

  2. lady mary. says:

    hurrah , matty b’s pic ,love him!,congratz everyone

  3. Pastyousayyouneverknew says:

    Warms my heart to hear this, congrats everyone! x

  4. UsedToBeLulu says:

    Same sex married by law couples should have every legal right afforded to them that heterosexual married by law couples have. This seems such a no brainer.

    What I find ludicrous is that the government doesn’t acknowledge a marriage that IT hasn’t sanctioned.

  5. Tiffany :) says:

    I am so happy!!!!!
    The ruling doesn’t make things perfect, but it is such a huge step and recognition that marriage inequality is unconstitutional!

  6. Happy21 says:

    That is awesome! Congratulations to the USA from Canada :)

  7. Marty says:

    Yay!!! Between this and Wendy Davis last night I have a smile on my face!

    I really want to get “Lawmakers, either get out of the vagina business or go to medical school” printed on a t-shirt now.

  8. Dommy Dearest says:

    Uh where is my comment? It’s great that California did this.

    But what about what happened in Texas last night? Showing politicians lying and cheating to get their way. The bill was pronounced dead but the proof that was there that our representatives have been lying and cheating was there. Televised even.

    Oh wait. It didn’t involve celebrities. Now I see.

    • krat says:

      Come on! The site is called CELEBITCHY, it’s not a hard news site!

      • Dommy Dearest says:

        Yeah you’re right, what should I expect. I mean this is only slightly political post. One that marks something quite significant. While the other event did the same but didn’t involve a celebrity. Given the large audience of the site covering it would only mean awareness by so many even if it doesn’t deal with the Kardashian or Lohans or all of the other normal people that we’ve put on the highest shelf for making movies or songs.

        My bad.

      • krat says:

        I’m not saying it can’t or shouldn’t be discussed, but the general policy of this site has been that they will cover political events that directly involve celebrities, and the more general (and yes, insanely important stuff like SB-5 and the SCOTUS overturning the VRA) political topics are best left to…sites that cover politics rather than celebrities? I certainly didn’t mean to offend, and I am definitely not in charge or anything.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      I would like to know more!

      I heard that there was an attempted filibuster that lasted 11 hours instead of the 13, but that the session ended before the bill could be voted on. Also that another session could be called to vote on the bill.

      What was the lying and cheating aspect? I would love to hear more.

      • Dommy Dearest says:

        You’re correct! The voting was to take place yesterday before midnight. The filibuster lasted long enough that the voting didn’t actually get to start until a minute or two after midnight. There were representatives on television yelling that it was illegal and there was serious outrage that followed. The bill ended up dead since it was so well documented that it was past the dateline of when the voting on the bill would end. It was an abortion bill in Texas that would close all but five in the entire state but thankfully it didn’t pass due to Wendy Davis filibustering from about 11:15 am until 10 pm.

        They tried to say that it was perfectly legal when the bill did pass BUT with it being televised everyone watching across the nation was able to see they were trying to break their own rules. Caught on tape of politicians attempting to have their way despite the known deadline. It makes you wonder just how many other bills have passed in that manner or just how many have been illegal passed period.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Oh, so they were trying to say it passed before midnight? So glad there were so many eyes watching! Without Wendy bringing attention to this vote, perhaps it would have gone unnoticed.

        Thanks for the extra details! :)

  9. booboocita says:

    And now I’m wondering. Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have stated publicly that they wouldn’t marry because their gay and lesbian friends didn’t have the right to do so. Will we see a Pitt-Jolie wedding soon?

    • Esti says:

      This doesn’t grant anyone new the right to get married — it just means that if you do get married in a state that allows same-sex marriage, the federal government has to recognize your marriage for things like Social Security benefits, immigration law, taxes, etc.

      I say “just” but it’s a huge deal for a lot of people. Both for practical implications, like gaining access to essential federal benefit programs and the ability to immigrate to the U.S. with your same-sex spouse, and for the symbolic importance.

      • bettyrose says:

        Actually it allows CA to start performing same sex marriages again, which has been on hold for a couple of years. Moreover those marriages will now be subject to the same federal benefits as opposite sex marriages. So it very much changes the scenario for anyone in CA who was waiting on this to marry.

      • Esti says:

        Yes, the Prop 8 case means that same-sex marriages will soon be able to resume in California. I should have been clearer that I was speaking about DOMA in my first comment.

  10. Virgilia Coriolanus says:

    Oh look, now the Brange can get married in France-I couldn’t resist.

  11. Diana says:

    I’m so happy about DOMA, I could cry. Yey for the supreme court!

  12. Arock says:

    Huzzah! Now let’s work on Texas abortion laws and immigration status reform. :)

  13. Arock says:

    Huzzah! Now let’s work on Texas abortion laws and immigration status reform. :)

    • LahdidahBaby says:

      …and Voter’s Rights, which took a major body-blow yesterday!

    • phlyfiremama says:

      Yes, we can NOT just let this illegal TX restriction fiasco go~in spite of CLEAR opposition to the SB 5, the conservative male dominated state legislature tried to strong arm a bill against abortion. Thanks to State Senators Wendy Davis & Leticia van de Putte, along with THOUSANDS of Texas women showing up to protest it, this effort FAILED. For now. Ladies, keep your eyes open! Oppressive regimes coming to your state legislatures soon~

  14. Debbie says:

    I’m beyond thrilled with these ruling, but I do hope everyone remembers, feels outrage and calls their congressmen over th SCOTUS’s decision yesterday to disgregard and diminish the civil rights of another group!

    Gay marriage should be legal (federally IMO) but the voters right act needs to be upheld in its entirety.

    Glad SCOTUS got two decisions right!

  15. LahdidahBaby says:

    Sad that there has to be any special law or judicial decision affording any one segment of this country’s population the same rights *everyone* already has under the Constitution, but at least it’s finally happened. It just pisses me off that a bunch of old musty men are making decisions about whether or not everyone is equal.

    Still. Grumbling aside,

    YAY!

  16. I Choose Me says:

    Fantastic. Let’s hope the ruling sticks.

  17. neelyo says:

    I’d be happier about this if the SCOTUS hadn’t gutted the Voting Rights Act yesterday. One step forward, one step back.

    • lucy2 says:

      I agree, the voters rights decision definitely clouds this, but I am very happy to see a major step towards equality for all.

      My only hope is that people fight back on the voting stuff. Politicians trying to suppress people from their right to vote is disgraceful.

  18. phlyfiremama says:

    Don’t forget that there is STILL no Equal Rights Amendment to the US Constitution. So gays can get married, slavery is illegal, but women still don’t have equal rights under Federal US Constitutional law. One step forward, TWO steps back~

  19. TWINK says:

    A historic day in the U.S. and worldwide as well! I bet scalia (lowercase intended) is in tears right now! hahahaha!

  20. EIleen says:

    Sheldon-Bazinga! Heh Heh! ( watching way too much BBT lately)

  21. Jayna says:

    Divorce lawyers everywhere are jumping up and down with happiness. LOL

    But a great day, for sure. Another step forward.

  22. FLORC says:

    Emily Blunt is drinking coconut water! Yuck! I have the best personal race times when i put coconut water in my water belt, but it’s just awful! But when you’re that thirsty you drinking i guess.

    • jwoolman says:

      But coconut water plus sugar makes great popsicles… Edy now has a Coconut Waters Outshine line. Have no idea what the brand name means, but the plain coconut and the coconut/banana and coconut/pineapple frozen bars are wonderful. You gave to take out a bank loan to buy them so I wait for coupons and sales. No dairy, based on coconut water, so I can actually eat them without consequence except for the sugar buzz.

  23. Simply Red says:

    This def good news to hear.. Congrats in order..

    Good see change is happening slowly but surely

  24. Isa says:

    It’s nice to come here and read these comments after reading the comments on my FB. They make me so sad.

  25. StaCat1 says:

    OVERDUE but thank goodness!!

  26. sauvage says:

    HURRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!! It’s about time!

  27. Janet says:

    Really interesting how the SC split on this.

    Overturn DOMA:
    For: Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan
    Against: Roberts, Alito, Scalia and Thomas. (No surprises here.)

    Kill Prop 8:
    For: Roberts, Ginsburg, Scalia, Breyer, Kagan.
    Against: Kennedy, Sotomayor, Alito and Thomas.

    Thomas voting against Scalia? Sotomayor voting with Scalia? WTF?!

    Anyway, the court got it right today, just like they got it wrong yesterday.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      I am just guessing here…

      Prop 8′s decision was that the SCOTUS shouldn’t decide the case because the people arguing in favor of Prop 8 were not representatives of the State of CA. They essentially threw it out, so it reverted back to the lower Federal court ruling.

      Sotomayor was probably saying that the SCOTUS DID have a right to decide this case…and she probably would have agreed with the lower federal court that Prop 8 was unconstitutional.

      In addition, Scalia was also probably siding not with those that oppose Prop 8, but with the idea that the SCOTUS shouldn’t be taking the case.

      Just a guess, though.

  28. Kim says:

    Regardless how one feels about same sex marriage its scary thing when Supreme Court overrules anything the people voted on. That is not a Democracy, that is a dictatorship. I am all for equal rights but feel we must uphold Democracy or we have nothing.

    Now we need to work on equal rights for women.

    • margie says:

      I think this is more of a basic human right- to be married to the one you love- than a voting issue. Being able to marry who you want should never have been up for vote or questioned in the first place. So when the voters threatened to take away a personal liberty that should be available to ALL PEOPLE, the SCOTUS had to step in and take care of business.

      • Kim says:

        Yes I agree – Prop 8 shouldnt have been allowed in first place. I just reread my email and see my thought wasnt clear. It just pissed off voters who voted for it and made them think votes mean nothing and this is scary for a true Democracy. It shouldnt have been a prop to vote on to begin with. It would have eliminated alot of taxpayers money at waste paying the courts etc to ponder over this for years. Waste of time & money and there are far more pressing issues that need serious consideration: womens rights, immigration, health care and now the IRS!

    • Tiffany :) says:

      I disagree. While voting is so important, the constitution makes clear that the majority can not take away the RIGHTS of the minority, even if it is the popular opinion.

      The term “right” has a very distinct definition. Voting and similar rights have been protected for minority populations only because they are rights, not because they were supported by popular opinion.

      The Supreme Court has called marriage a “right” more than 14 times. They have used phrases like “basic right of man” , “fundamental right”, etc. If it is a right, it should not be up to a vote.

    • Mrs.Krabapple says:

      Did “the people” vote on DOMA? I thought it was congress.

      If you are referring to Prop 8, the Supreme Court did not declare it unconstitutional. The Court merely said the private parties supporting Prop 8 did not have sufficient “standing” to bring their appeal in federal court. Who knows how the Court would have ruled if it had to decide the merits?

      And I agree with others that “fundamental rights” (which marriage is) should not be left to the whim of voters.

    • Jackie Jormp Jomp (formerly Zelda) says:

      People are not allowed to “vote” on what are deemed “Rights.” The Supreme Court determined that the legal contract of marriage between 2 consenting adults is a lawful right.

    • Marigold says:

      We don’t live in a simple democracy. We live in a representative democracy. Learn what that means and remember it. And then learn this-when people vote for something that directly violates the Constitutional rights of some and they create a law based on that vote, the SCOTUS can choose to become involved and then they become the authority on that matter, the people’s vote be damned. Honestly, you have painted yourself extremely ignorant of Constitutional law. Please take some time to read the document.

  29. Mandy says:

    Yay! So happy, there is hope in this world after all! :)

  30. matia says:

    Strange news but just saw a clip of mormon polygamists celebrating the ruling too bc they also hope it applies to their unions. The guys name was joe darger and he has 24 kids….crazy

  31. Norman says:

    It is about time. The younger people in this country are getting the issue when it comes to gay marriage as it is supported overwhelmingly by those 30 and under. Even young conservatives are getting the message in this largely generational issue . The NBC/WSJ poll states that in April 2013 53% of Americans support the right of gays to marry. The people who are against it can say little other than slurs, “Why not marry a horse then” and people writing incoherently in all CAPS is we have seen on the all to frequently reactionary TMZ reader commentary.

  32. PaulY says:

    Who said anything about rewriting the Bible? This has nothing to do with religion, and everything to do with basic human rights.

  33. apsutter says:

    Shenanigans. No God “created” marriage. Marriage existed LOOOOOONG before Christianity, Judaism, Mormonism, Buddhism a.k.a all of the current world religions. People were married when Pagans still ran the earth. If individual churches don’t want to offer religious ceremonies no one is going to make them. However, marriage is a contract between two people under the LAW. Marriage matters to people and it legitimizes a union between two people in a way no other union can. I am rejoicing in the fact that gay couples will be equal under federal law now.

  34. Marigold says:

    Marriage is a legal union, a right afforded to individuals by the state they live in. If you choose to make it religious, so be it. But religion is not necessary in this country to marry. You don’t have to like it but it’s reality, also known as fact. Yes, marriage is utilized for many reasons-all legal. Whether you consider it hijacked by the government or not simply doesn’t matter. You might as well complain to a brick wall for all the good it will do you. It’s been a legal institution for so long that its history is irrelevant.

  35. Marigold says:

    Also, the government doesn’t make churches marry anyone. Have you been to a Catholic same sex wedding yet? I didn’t think so.

  36. Jackie Jormp Jomp (formerly Zelda) says:

    As far as the govt is concerned, marriage is a legal contract. There is seperation of church and state. And I do believe that is in your constitution.

  37. Trillian says:

    No, it is not truth. It is something YOU believe, but that doesn’t make it true.

    God was created by people, the bible was written by people and this law was now (finally) decided on by people.

  38. Poppy says:

    Romans 13:1 – Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

    I’m religious, but I also happen to think that other people’s secular, legal marriages are none of my business. Is this ruling in any way going to affect your marriage? No. Are they *forcing* churches to undertake same-sex marriages? No.

  39. Emily says:

    LOL.
    Marriage in the past was about a father selling his daughter so he no longer had to keep her and so she could go provide children for someone. It was a transaction and the girl was property. She had no say in the matter, it was akin to slavery although far more socially acceptable. Society evolves and changes, for the better. Would you like the tradition of marriage to remain the same? Then perhaps you don’t deserve an opinion if you cant even see how horrible and unjust it used to be.

  40. JennJ says:

    Just curious: you believe that God created marriage for the whole world long before the Bible was written, right? So the fact that the institution of marriage pre-dates the Bible is irrelevant to your belief system.

    And on another note: to state something as the truth without having verifiable proof to back it up sounds like ignorance and arrogance to non-believers. Perhaps a little humility and consideration would help bridge the chasm between us.

  41. Jarredsgirl says:

    Nicole Richie reminds me of Ellen. Very inquisitive and funny, she would make a good talk show host.