The Latest on the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear oral arguments in a case about the right of gay and transgender people to wear certain clothing, but it may not be enough to get a ruling.
The justices will take up the issue in January.
They could take up other issues during the next term, and their decisions are a crucial part of the federal government’s ability to enforce its anti-discrimination laws.
But a ruling on the matter could take months or years, especially if the high court decides to keep its current schedule of cases.
In the meantime, the Supreme Judicial Court has been working to address the issue, and on Monday it made a ruling that could have big implications for other states.
In the case of Colorado’s gay and lesbian couples, the court ruled 5-4 that the state has no right to deny them the right to marry.
The ruling could have implications for hundreds of other states, including California, New Jersey and Illinois.
In Colorado, which is one of only a few states that does not permit same-sex marriage, the justices were asked to weigh in on a question about whether Colorado has the legal right to refuse to recognize same-seeming marriages performed elsewhere.
The court said no.
“Colorado has no ‘right’ to refuse same-gender marriages that are performed in other states,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote in her majority opinion.
“Nor does Colorado have a right to make such an inference.
It is not clear that Colorado can impose its own rules regarding marriage ceremonies.
Colorado is free to adopt the rules of other States or recognize same marriage ceremonies performed elsewhere.”
The ruling has serious implications for gay and trans people, who often face discrimination at the hands of government officials.
In Colorado, the state is among a few that have passed laws to prevent discrimination in employment and housing based on sexual orientation.
Colorado has passed laws that prohibit discrimination in public accommodations based on sex, gender identity, race, ethnicity, religion, marital status, age, disability and political beliefs.
But the court did not explicitly rule that Colorado has a right under the Colorado Constitution to refuse marriage ceremonies that are conducted elsewhere.
In its ruling, the high Court ruled that Colorado’s constitution provides the state with the “exclusive power” to deny recognition of same-race marriage, a position that the court has also previously stated.
The case involved a Denver couple who wanted to get married in the state, but because they are gay and they live in the Denver metro area, they decided to travel to the state to marry on Jan. 5, 2019.
In a statement, the couple said the ruling made them feel “frightened” and “embarrassed.”
“Our first instinct was to leave Colorado.
We are thrilled that the Supreme Courts has taken a strong stand on this issue,” the couple wrote in a statement.
“Our community is now safe from discrimination and we can continue to live in a state where we are treated with dignity.”
The decision also found that Colorado had the right not to recognize the same-same-sex marriages performed in Colorado, but only those performed in the other states that have not enacted such laws.
The Supreme Court ruling does not change Colorado’s existing laws.
It only applies to same-couple marriages, which can be performed in any state.
The state still must make sure it follows state laws on the issue.
In a statement to CNNMoney, Colorado Attorney General Bob Ferguson said, “We are pleased with the Supreme [Court] decision.
We look forward to moving forward with the case.”
The Colorado attorney general’s office has also been working on a case that would allow transgender people, but its efforts have been hindered by the high cost of filing a lawsuit.
A case brought by the National Center for Lesbian Rights in December 2018 found that the cost of hiring attorneys to represent transgender people in a lawsuit against the state could reach $8,000.
The Colorado Civil Rights Division, which handles the lawsuit, has said it is working on ways to reduce the cost, but has said the issue remains one of significant legal complexity and cost.
“Our office is looking into ways to lower the legal cost of our clients’ cases and continue to ensure the state of Colorado does not discriminate against its LGBT citizens,” spokesman Jeff Smith said in a letter to CNN.
“We remain confident that the law is on our side and that Colorado does have a duty to protect its residents from discrimination.”