Here everyone is our own Nancy Pelosi responding to Rep. Michele Bachmann's comments today that the Supreme Court decisions don't undo "God's word." Watch and enjoy.

She shrugs and mutters, "Who cares?" The audience of reporters laughs.

California Representative Mark Takano decides to elaborate a little further on DOMA to say, "In the fullness of time, I firmly believe with every conviction in my heart that every American will come to celebrate this decision. This decision was not imposed on the American people, it merely ratified what was already in the hearts and minds of a majority of Americans."

If you care to listen to some conservative congresspeople, including Bachmann, talk about "unelected judges" and the "chaos" that shall follow this DOMA ruling, you can do so here.

[C-Span]

Wednesday morning at City Hall, a crowd of same sex marriage supporters, partners, parents, families and San Francisco dignitaries gathered to mark the Supreme Court's decision to declare DOMA unconstitutional and the return of legal gay marriage to California.

The crowd was restrained, but joyful as they watched commentary come in from Washington, D.C. on screens set up beneath the city hall rotunda. Spectators lined the the second and third floor balconies as former Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom and Mayor Ed Lee walked Phyllis Lyon down the grand staircase to her seat. National Center for Lesbian Rights executive director Kate Kendall dropped a very opportune f-bomb.

Meanwhile, in the Castro a modest group celebrated with typical Castro flair.

Expect the real celebrations to hit the Castro tonight, when festivities are expected to begin around 6:30.

DOMA declared unconstitutional by SCOTUS in a 5-4 ruling. The court ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act "is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the 5th amendment." And SCOTUSblog Tweeted, "The federal government cannot disparage marriages recognized by the states, says the Court."

Here's the PDF of the Supreme Court's ruling; the Washington Post notes, "Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is often the swing vote, wrote the opinion." He wrote, "The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity... DOMA instructs all federal officials, and indeed all persons with whom same-sex couples interact, including their own children, that their marriage is less worthy than the marriages of others."

Justice Antonin Scalia wrote one of three dissents, "By formally declaring anyone opposed to same-sex marriage an enemy of human decency, the majority arms well every challenger to a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition."

Prop 8 ruling to come. (Or not.)

UPDATE: Gay marriage now legal in the state of California.

We thought it might be Thursday, but SCOTUS is in fact planning to close up shop a day early for their summer recess, and the final big decisions of the term are to be announced Wednesday, June 26. Those would be the Prop 8 and DOMA cases, of course, otherwise known as Hollingsworth vs. Perry and United States vs. Windsor, and the S.F. gay community is already optimistically planning a big street party in the Castro starting at 6:30 p.m.

Starting at around 7:30 a.m., directly after the decisions are announced, there will be a press conference gathering on the steps of City Hall led by City Attorney Dennis Herrera and his press secretary Matt Dorsey. Dorsey earlier laid out the possible outcomes of the case, and it is likely that the court will either rule on the standing issue, or will decide that it should not have granted review for the case at all, both of which mean California is likely to be able to resume having gay marriages as early as late July. The standing ruling, though, or any complicated other ruling that Justice Kennedy is likely crafting, could open the door for further challenges in California around Prop 8, so we can't be totally sure just yet that there is reason to party. Significantly better would be a ruling that narrowly strikes down Prop 8 and reframes civil unions as so marriage-like that the seven states that currently have them, like California, will be forced to call these legal marriage. In any event, a sweeping ruling striking down Prop 8 on its merits, allowing gay marriage nationwide, is not likely. See the New Yorker's handy interactive info-graphic to see what the outcomes may be state by state.

City Hall and Civic Center are likely to be bustling with activity, and news cameras, throughout the day given that the city was a party to the Prop 8 lawsuit. Oh, and assuming the news is mostly good for the cause of marriage equality, there will be protesters from the other side, probably.

Meanwhile, up in the Castro, a rally is planned at 6:30 p.m. which is likely to be more of a party if the news is good. That will go until 9 p.m., and should involve street closures and possibly a DJ.

All signs point to SCOTUS striking down DOMA tomorrow, which in itself will be huge news for LGBT rights and a big step forward in gay marriage law in general. It will (presumably) mean that everyone who is legally married, in whatever state, will be treated equally for tax and immigration purposes under federal law. And so, hopefully, we should have more than one reason for celebration.

[BCN/Appeal]
[Mercury-News]
[CBS]

All previous Prop 8 coverage on SFist.

Former SFister Matt Baume was in DC and got to breeze through today's Supreme Court hearings on the DOMA case, a.k.a. United States v. Windsor. He took some cell phone video on his way out, just a couple hours ago, showing the active scene at the foot of the court steps, with protesters rallying on both sides. You can also hear those exiting the court saying, "Oh my god," and "That was so overwhelming."

Round two of the Supreme Court's discussion of same-sex marriage this week finds the highest court in the land debating the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, one of the more questionable decisions President Clinton made while in office.

Justice Kennedy, who declined to give an opinion either way on Proposition 8 yesterday, swung to the left this morning, joining the liberals in questioning why anyone would defend the law that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman for federal benefits programs. From the New York Times:

'The question is whether or not the federal government under a federalism system has the authority to regulate marriage,' Justice Kennedy said during oral arguments, suggesting that the question should be left to the states. He disagreed with the contention that the federal law simply created a single definition for federal purposes, noting that same-sex couples are not treated the same as other married couples. 'It’s not really uniformity,' he said.

Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who totally called this back in September, showed off her playful side saying DOMA effectively created two kinds of marriage: "Full marriage and the skim-milk marriage.”

Attorney Paul Clement spoke on behalf of House Republicans (or just John Boehner), telling the court that the federal government "a legitimate interest" in the debate. Using a tired defense, Clement told the court that lawmakers were concerned if one state expanded the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples it would effectively force other states recognize them as well.

On the conservative side of the bench, Chief Justice Roberts was apparently irritated that the case made it to the Supreme Court at all. President Obama has declared the act unconstitutional, but continues to enforce it until the Supreme Court weighs in. It's a wishy-washy tactic by the Obama Administration, and Roberts called him on it, saying the President should "have the courage of his convictions" and not enforce the law.

Regardless, SCOTUSblog sees this one turning out very well for gay rights advocates and not so well for the Defense of Marriage Act:

A PDF transcript of this morning's oral arguments can be found here. Audio is available here.

In Washington, D.C. this morning, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments from opponents and defenders of California's same-sex marriage ban. The purpose of this morning's hearing was to simply to decide whether or not defenders of the ban have any grounds to appeal the earlier district court ruling in California declaring the measure unconstitutional, as well as the constitutionality of the measure itself. The court appears evenly divided on both counts, with Justice Kennedy apparently unwilling to weigh in for either side due to the relative newness of same-sex marriage.

"Much will be written about the Proposition 8 oral argument. The bottom line, in my opinion," writes SCOTUS Blog Publisher Tom Goldstein this morning, "is that the Court probably will not have the five votes necessary to get to any result at all, and almost certainly will not have five votes to decide the merits of whether Proposition 8 is constitutional."

Defenders of the same-sex marriage ban continued to argue that states should be able to decide for themselves whether or not to permit gay and lesbian couples to wed legally. Justice Kennedy also noted the doubts about the petitioners' standing, and without giving a swing vote he suggested that the case should be dismissed. Although he acknowledged that some 40,000 children in California are waiting to have their parents' marriages recognized by the state, he seemed skeptical about the relative newness of same-sex marriages and the impact it could have on society. “We have five years of information to pose against 2,000 years of history or more,” Kennedy told the court.

According to Goldstein, those oral arguments are likely to hold up, meaning one of two things could happen here: Chief Justice Roberts along with the liberal members of the court could form a majority, and decide the supporters of Prop 8 lack standing to appeal the earlier decision. That would vacate the Ninth Circuit decision, but would keep the district court decision invalidating Prop 8's ban on same-sex marriage. In this scenario another case with different petitioners could come before the court in a few years.

In a second scenario, the Court could dismiss the case entirely due to their inability to reach a majority. It looks like this is Kennedy's move and Goldstein seems to think Justice Sotomayor will join him in this view. If other liberal justices follow suit, the case will be dismissed and the ruling would leave the Ninth Circuit Court's decision in place and the same-sex marriage ban would still be unconstitutional.

Both scenarios are a step forward for marriage equality, although neither is a particularly huge moment for advocates of equal rights. Basically, the Supreme Court won't weigh in until they feel the rest of the public has had time to catch up with the increasingly popular opinion that marriage is a basic right that should be available to all couples. If the case is dismissed, it is very likely individual states will continue marching towards marriage equality with their own legislation.

Last month, the Obama administration also urged the Supreme Court to strike down Prop 8 while also allowing the individual states to maintain regulation over the institution of marriage. In effect, Obama urged states that already recognize all the benefits and privileges of marriage for same-sex couples in the form of "civil unions," to go one step further and allow those couples to be married.

Tomorrow morning, the court will hear two hours of arguments on the Defense of Marriage Act.

Audio from this morning's Prop 8 arguments can be heard here on the Supreme Court's website. A transcript of the hearing can also be found here. [PDF link]

Tomorrow and Wednesday represent a milestone moment for gay rights as the U.S. Supreme Court will review the Prop 8 and DOMA cases to determine the status of marriage equality nationwide. Tonight, head on over to the Castro for a march to show support for equal protection and equal rights. The March4Equality rally is planned to be the largest among over 150 other events across the country.

Event co-organizer (and regular SFist commenter!) Patrick Connors had this to tell Uptown Almanac about the significance of tonight:

I'm being a bit sarcastic, but this could very well be the LAST time any organizing has to be done against Prop 8. This is the last chapter (knock on wood) and considering that DOMA is also on the chopping block, there is history--maybe even life changing history--about to be made.

So I'm encouraging EVERYONE who wants to make news to appear one last time for the photo op of all photo ops that will hopefully show the media/country/assholes of the world that many many many people are paying attention and eager to end this bullshit.

So, if you like humans and enjoy the concepts of love and equality, go ahead and make some signs, grab your friends, and be on the corner of Market and Castro at 6:30pm tonight.

[Uptown Almanac]

After launching into an anti-gay tirade onstage at Yoshi's in San Francisco Sunday night, alt-folk singer Michelle Shocked unleashed a torrent of backlash that looks like an apparent career suicide. The fallout of Shocked's comments so far: Eight ten venues from Los Angeles to Seattle to Chicago have all canceled upcoming dates on her "25 Years of Short Sharp Shocked" tour or obliterated her name from their calendars entirely.

With the remainder of Shocked's American tour now missing from venue lineups across the country, the backlash even hit her Wikipedia page for a short time, where editors briefly updated her page to call her a "bigot" and a "closeted lesbian." Those changes have since been removed, but even her booking agent — who says she hasn't worked with Shocked in over four years — has distanced herself from her former client's comments.

Shocked has something of a reputation for flip-flopping on her own role within the gay community: She once came out as a lesbian before joining the West Angeles Church of God in the mid-'90s. In 2008 she said in an interview with a gay newspaper in Dallas that would be "honored" to be called an "honorary lesbian" despite her born-again Christian status, but reversed her stance again in 2011 saying, "Who drafted me as a gay icon? You are looking at the world’s greatest homophobe. Ask God what He thinks.”

As SFist noted yesterday, the timing of Shocked's comments seemed deliberate, as though the singer wasn't so much celebrating the 25th anniversary of her album as she was intentionally making a scene in the lead-up to Supreme Court decisions on California's same-sex marriage ban and the Defense of Marriage Act.

Previously: Michelle Shocked Launches Into Anti-Gay Rant On Stage at Yoshi's

As we learned last month, somewhat anxiously, the Supreme Court will be hearing and likely issuing rulings on the constitutionality of California's Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act in their current term. Today they announced the dates of those hearings. On March 26 they will hear arguments in Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Prop 8 challenge which was upheld by the 9th Circuit, and on March 27 they will hear arguments in a second landmark gay marriage case, United States v. Windsor.

In the former case, several gay couples sued the State of California arguing that Proposition 8, as passed by voters in 2008 and which rendered gay marriage illegal in California, was an unconstitutional violation of their rights.

The second case, which relates to DOMA, involves a widowed New York lesbian sued the government for having had to pay estate taxes upon her wife's death.

Legal experts were somewhat surprised that the court chose to take on the Prop 8 matter, which relates specifically to the California constitution, given that the DOMA case is more grounded in tax law and more clearly about federal equality. There's some ongoing nervousness among gay marriage advocates that this dual approach, ruling on both cases in tandem, may result in a split decision in which the DOMA battle gets won and the Prop 8 battle gets lost, which would be bad news for the California LGBT community and will likely lead to another statewide referendum. It could also set the clocks back for other states where gay marriage remains illegal via state referendum.

Activists on both sides should now be looking into plane tickets to D.C. to make some noise on the court steps in late March. Decisions in both cases would likely come in, in dramatic fashion, in the final weeks of the court's term in June.

[CBS 5]

All previous Prop 8 coverage on SFist.