Three of the women who risked their lives to save their students were killed in the Newtown, CT massacre.

First Grade Teacher Victoria Soto, Age 27.

Victoria Soto's lifelong dream was to become a teacher. Her last moments were spent rushing her students into a closet when gunshots started going off. When the gunman entered her classroom, she shielded her students from incoming bullets.

Soto graduated from Eastern Connecticut State University with an elementary education and history degree and was studying for a master's degree in special education at Southern Connecticut State University. Soto loved spending time with her family, and her dog, a black Labrador named Roxie. She had been at Sandy Hook for more than five years, starting as an intern before becoming a teacher.

"It brings peace to know that Vicki was doing what she loved, protecting the children and in our eyes, she’s a hero,” her cousin Jim Wiltsie said. “She lost her life doing what she loved. I don’t think she would have it any other way. She loved kids, her goal in life was to be a teacher and to mold young minds and that’s what she achieved and unfortunately lost her life protecting those children.”

Source: resources3.news.com.au

First Grade Teacher Kaitlin Roig, Age 29

Kaitlin Roig survived the tragic events at Sandy Hook Elementary school. Thanks to her heroism, so did 15 children. When she first heard gunshots she quickly ushered 15 students into a tiny bathroom, and pulled a bookshelf across the door before locking it. Roig told her students to be "absolutely quiet".

"I just knew we had to get in there, I just kept telling them it's going to be OK. We are going to be alright," said Roig.

Roig, who has been a teacher at Sandy Hook Elementary School for more than five years, refused to even unlock the bathroom door for police. "I didn't believe them," she said to ABC News, holding back tears. "I told them if they were cops, they could get the key. They did and then [they] unlocked the bathroom."

Source: images.watoday.com.au

School Psychologist Mary Sherlach, Age 56

Mary Sherlach, had worked at Sandy Hook Elementary School school since 1994 and was one year away from retirement. She enjoyed her work as a psychologist, and enjoyed helping young kids. When gunshots rang out her first instinct was to head toward the danger. Like principal Dawn Hochsprung, she died protecting kids by confronting the gunman.

She was married for 31 years to her husband Bill, and had two adult daughters ages 25 and 28. Her older daughter was a high school choir teacher. She kept a website where she kept parents informed on the school's special education system.

A former school superintendent John Reed praised her as a friendly, smart, and loving person.

“If there ever was a person, by qualifications and personality, to work with children, to be a school psychologist, it was Mary,’’ Reed said.

Image by AP / AP

Music Teacher Maryrose Kristopik, Age 50

Maryrose Kristopik's actions during the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting can't be described as anything but heroic. Thanks to her, 20 students survived Friday's tragic events.

When the first shots rang out, the quick-thinking Kristopik moved her class of 20 into a nearby closet and barricaded the door.

"I did take the children into the closet and talked with them to keep them quiet. I told them that I loved them," Kristopik said in an interview with the Daily Mail. "I said there was a bad person in the school. I didn't want to tell them anything past that." Kristopik held the door tightly closed even as the gunman reportedly was yelling "Let me in! Let me in!"

One mother of an eight-year-old student in Krisopik's class said her daughter was safe due to her heroic actions. "My daughter's teacher is my hero," the mother said to the Newton Patch. "She locked all the kids in a closet and that saved their lives."

“All of the staff members worked hard at our school to help our children,” Kristopik said to the NY Daily News. “Now it’s time to focus on helping the families who lost their children today.”

Source: i.dailymail.co.uk

View Entire List ›

Members reported on Twitter that they would protest Sandy Hook Elementary School. Reddit members have already begun planning a counter protest.

Less than a day after the tragic shooting in Sandy Hook, Connecticut that claimed the lives of 20 children and six adults, members of the Westboro Baptist Church are already announcing plans to protest during and after President Obama'a visit on Sunday. The hate group is best known for its protest of the funerals of U.S. service members.

“Westboro will picket Sandy Hook Elementary School to sing praise to God for the glory of his work in executing his judgment," Shirley Phelps-Roper, a member of the church, tweeted.

Another member of the church, Abigail Ruth Phelps tweeted "I will show this sign to President Obama tomorrow." Jael Holroyd also announced her intentions to protest.

Members of the website Reddit announced their intent to form a silent blockade to counter protest the church.

The White House announced on Saturday that President Obama would travel to Newtown, CT Sunday and meet with the families of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary school shootings along with first responders.

July 22: People lock arms to prevent members of the Westboro Baptist Church from attending a memorial service outside the Aurora Municipal Center in Colorado.

Image by Joshua Lott / Getty Images

The Manhattan Children’s Chorus Singing “Silent Night.”

View Video ›

Image by NBC

“The NRA's power is so vastly overrated,” the New York City Mayor said.

Source: youtube.com

WASHINGTON — New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg called on President Barack Obama to make gun control legislation "his number one agenda" in the wake of the murder of 26 students and teachers in Newtown, Conn. on Friday.

"If he does nothing during his 2nd term, something like 48,000 Americans will be killed with illegal guns," Bloomberg said Sunday morning on NBC's Meet The Press. "It's time for the president to stand up and lead and tell this country what we should do."

Bloomberg noted that Obama campaigned in 2008 on renewing the Assault Weapons Ban, and that he hasn't followed through on it.

"I think the president, through his leadership, could get a bill like that through Congress — but at least he has to try," Bloomberg said. The Republican-turned-Independent endorsed Obama just before the November election citing his stance on global warming.

"The president, is the one who has to lead this," Bloomberg added, discounting some Democratic concerns about a backlash to new legislation.

"This myth that the NRA can destroy political careers is just not true," Blomberg said, pointing to the pro-gun organization's failure to unseat Obama despite spending millions against him. "The NRA's power is so vastly overrated."

Bloomberg called mass shootings a uniquely American problem.

"It only happens in America — and it happens again and again," he said. "We kill people in schools, we kill them in hospitals, we kill them in religious organizations, we kill them when they are young, we kill them when they are old — and we've just got to stop this."

Feinstein says she believes Obama will support it.

WASHINGTON — Democratic Senator Diane Feinstein said Sunday that she will introduce a new ban on assault weapons when the new Congress convenes next year, and she expects President Barack Obama to support it.

Appearing on Meet The Press in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting that killed 26 on Friday, Feinstein, who sponsored the first federal ban on assault weapons which expired in 2004, said she is ready to push to reinstate it.

"It's being done with care, it will be ready on the first day, I'll be announcing House authors, and we'll be prepared to go — and I hope the nation will be prepared to help," she said.

Asked whether Obama will speak out in favor of it, Feinstein said, "I believe he will."

Obama supported reinstating the ban in his 2008 campaign, but invested little political capital in it. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Friday that the ban "remain[s] a commitment of his," but administration officials have been mum on the type of "meaningful action" Obama will propose in response to the mass shooting.

The model is to go silent for at least a day, depending on the scope of the tragedy.

July 20th Aurora Colorado Theater Shooting: Ten Days Without Tweeting

August 5th Sikh Temple Shooting: One Day Without Tweeting

December 11th Clackamas Town Center Shooting: One Day Without Tweeting

December 14th Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting: Three Days (And Counting) Without Tweeting

View Entire List ›

Long lines and brisk retail. Store owners chalk it up to holiday shopping.

Source: georgiagunstore.com

View Entire List ›

“Newtown, you are not alone,” Obama says at an interfaith vigil. “We'll have to change.”

View Video ›

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama sought to bring comfort to the people of Newtown and across the country Sunday night, speaking at a vigil to honor the 27 lives lost in Friday's shooting, but also called for national soul-searching — and action — to prevent future massacres.

"We as a nation are left with some hard questions," Obama said in a somber speech at Newtown High School after meeting with the families of the dead and the first responders who rushed to the scene of the carnage.

"We can't tolerate this anymore," he said, traveling for the fourth time of his presidency to a community torn by gunfire, but also referencing smaller acts of violence in cities and towns across the country. "These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change."

And the fourth time, Obama's lofty rhetoric gave way to a determined call for change. Stating that every generation is judged by how well it cares for the ones following it, Obama gave his brutal assessment that the country is failing to keep its children safe.

“If we’re honest with ourselves, the answer is no," he said. "We’re not doing enough, and we’ll have to change.”

"What choice do we have?" Obama added, visibly steeling himself as he faced the families. "Are we really prepared to say that we're powerless in the face of such carnage, that the politics are too hard?"

On Friday, speaking through tears and pausing to compose himself, Obama called for "meaningful action" after the shooting, and many in his party and across the country called for the immediate proposal of legislation to strengthen gun control. Obama didn't specify what steps he will take Sunday, but forcefully said he will “use whatever power this office hold to engage my fellow citizens…to prevent tragedies like this.”

"Are we prepared to say that such violence visited upon our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom," Obama asked, in a sign that he will take up such legislation, even without mentioning the word "gun" in his speech. "No single law or set of laws can eliminate evil from the world," he added, "...but that can't be an excuse for inaction."

Closing his remarks after reading the first names of the 20 first graders who were shot dead, Obama called for the nation to come together — to stop acts of violence.

"Let us find the strength to carry on and to make our country worthy of their memory," he said, as sobs echoed through the auditorium.

View Video ›

A touching moment from Sunday's memorial in Newtown.

Via: @Chass63

From the daughter of Dawn Hochsprung:

LINK: More on Dawn Hochsprung.

The principal remembered as a hero.

View Entire List ›

Rep. Tim Scott, South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley's pick to fill Sen. Jim DeMint's seat, will be the South's first black senator since Reconstruction.

Scott Is a Tea Party Darling

Rep. Scott is a member of the Tea Party movement that departing Sen. Jim DeMint helped establish in Congress during the 2010 midterm elections. During the 2011 debt ceiling debate, Scott refused to support House Speak Boehner's plan to resolve the crisis. Scott held out for a "stronger provision to guarantee a balanced-budget amendment," according to the Washington Post. But Scott remains a favorite of the speaker — helping Boehner keep ties with the conservative faction of the caucus while serving in his leadership team as a member of the 2010 freshman class.

Scott Is a Social Conservative

In a section of his website headlined "Defending traditional values," Scott explains that he is "unapologetically pro-life," will "fight for religious freedoms," and supports "traditional marriage." The institution of marriage, says Scott, "is the unity of one man and one woman. Allowing the government to weaken the definition of marriage takes away from our children and we must not allow that to happen."

Scott Was Raised by a Single Mother

Scott was raised by his mother, Frances Scott, who worked 16-hour-a-day shifts as a nurse's assistant. "Growing up in a single-parent home left me a bit disillusioned about life," Scott has said. "My parents divorced when I was around the age of 7. By the time I entered high school, I was completely off track. My mother was working hard, trying to help me realize that there was a brighter future, but I really couldn't see it."

Scott's Childhood Mentor Was an Evangelical Manager at a Chick-fil-A

When Scott was struggling in school, he met evangelical conservative John Moniz, who was a manager at a local Chick-fil-A, where Scott would go to "get french fries all the time," Scott has said. "Over the course of three or four years, John transformed my way of thinking, which changed my life...the lessons that John was teaching me were maybe simple lessons, but they were profound lessons."

View Entire List ›

The 47 year-old congressman will replace Sen. Jim DeMint to become the Republicans' first black senator in over than 30 years.

View Video ›

“I don’t have a series of proposals to present to you,” says the White House press secretary.

Image by Alex Wong / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said that gun control legislation will be a component of the federal response President Barack Obama will push for after the shooting deaths of 27 in Newtown, Connecticut, on Friday.

"It’s a complex problem that will require a complex solution," Carney told reporters on Monday at the White House. "No single piece of legislation, no single action will fully address this problem.”

Asked whether gun control legislation will be a component of that solution, Carney replied, “It’s part of it, but it’s far from all of it.”

Carney repeated that Obama said at a vigil in Newtown Sunday night that he would "use the power of his office to engage the American people," including "lawmakers, law enforcement, and mental health experts" in an effort to prevent these kinds of mass shootings.

"It has clearly shocked the entire nation, and has laid bare the necessity of evaluating the various things we can and must do as a nation to better protect our children," he added.

But Carney was short on any specifics, saying "I don’t have a series of proposals to present to you," and refusing to say what if any actions Obama has taken in his first term to curtail the availability of assault weapons.

“Words alone cannot heal our nation — only action can do that,” said the New York mayor.

View Video ›

An emotional New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Monday afternoon that if the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School does not inspire action on gun control from the White House and Congress, "it will be a stain on our nation's commitment to protecting the innocent, including our children."

Bloomberg, a staunch and confrontational proponent of gun control, laid out a three-pronged plan for legislative action. The mayor urged the president to enforce stronger background checks on gun sales by executive order, with "a simple stroke of his pen, not needing approval from anybody else," he said.

Bloomberg said it was also time to "pass an enforceable and effective assault weapons ban," which expired in 2004 despite support for reinstatement from President George W. Bush.

Lastly, Bloomberg said the president and Congress "should make gun trafficking a felony," citing the Gun Trafficking Prevention act sponsored by New York Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand.

"This legislative package would make it harder for criminals, drug abusers, and the mentally ill to get guns," said Bloomberg, adding that the three steps would not be a "panacea," but would "go a long way" to limiting gun violence.

The mayor also called on the president to make it "a higher priority" to appoint a director to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, a government department that has not had a confirmed director for six years. "Can you imagine the outrage if the Department of Homeland Security went six years without a director?" said Bloomberg.

"If the massacre in Tucson wasn't enough to make our national leaders act," added Bloomberg, "and if the bloodshed in Aurora, Colorado; in Oak Creek, Wisconsin; in Portland, Oregon; and in other cities and towns wasn't enough — perhaps this slaughter of innocence at Sandy Hook Elementary School will at long last be enough."

Regarding the possibility that Congress and the president will be too tied up with fiscal cliff negotiations to act on gun control, the mayor said, "If Congress and the president can't focus on two things at once, who on earth did we elect?"

Action in the case, beginning in mid-January, will continue through until the court hears oral arguments in the case. The 1996 law has been struck down by two appeals courts.

Edith Windsor's challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act is before the Supreme Court.

Image by Shannon Stapleton / Reuters

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has set a schedule for one of the key cases in its docket for next year, requesting the first filings in a lesbian widow's challenge to the Defense of Marriage act for the day after President Obama's inauguration.

The court order also made clear the complexity of the case reaching the Supreme Court over the Defense of Marriage Act's federal definition of "marriage" and "spouse."

The court in a Friday order has separated the briefing in Edith Windsor's challenge to DOMA into two portions: one focused on the merits of the question of whether DOMA is constitutional and the other focused on the questions the court has asked regarding whether it even has the authority to hear the case.

Although two federal appeals courts have struck down the law as unconstitutional, one of which was in Windsor's case, the questions about the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to hear the case were not discussed at length in earlier hearings and have added an element of uncertainty to the case.

The first filings are slated for Jan. 22 and will come in two parts: the House Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG), established by Republican leadership, will argue defense of the law on the merits; and Vicki Jackson, a court-appointed lawyer, will make the case that the court lacks jurisdiction.

Responses from the Obama administration, BLAG and Windsor to Jackson's arguments will be due by Feb. 20. These will be technical arguments about whether the Obama administration's decision to agree with the Windsor that the law is unconstitutional makes this no longer a case that the court can hear and whether BLAG — as a part of the legislative branch — has the constitutional ability to be a party to the case.

Then, on Feb. 22, the Obama administration's brief on the merits of the case is due. Windsor's merits brief will be due four days later, on Feb. 26.

The final briefs replying to the above arguments will be due on the merits of the case from BLAG and regarding the jurisdictional questions from Jackson or others within 30 days of the previous brief but due at the court "not later than 2 p.m. one week before the date of oral argument."

Although the date of oral argument has not yet been set, it is expected to be in late March. Additionally, the separation of arguments into different briefing calendars suggests that the oral argument itself could be separated into one section on the jurisdictional questions and another on the merits of DOMA's constitutionality. The court took a similar approach in the previous term to questions about the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act.

In addition to the Windsor challenge to DOMA, the court also is hearing the challenge to California's Proposition 8. No additional instructions from the court about the briefing in that case have been issued, so the opening brief, which is to address both merits and jurisdictional questions, is as of now due from the proponents of Proposition 8 on Jan. 22.

Supreme Court Briefing Order

“It appears the Senate will be coming back the day after Christmas,” Reid says. Vows to deal with Sandy relief, fiscal cliff.

Image by Alex Wong / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — The Senate will likely work overtime this holiday season to approve a fiscal cliff package before the end of the year, Majority Leader Harry Reid acknowledged Monday.

"We will see if anything changes, but it appears that we're going to be coming back the day after Christmas to complete work on the fiscal cliff," Reid said on the Senate floor.

With Christmas nearing, lawmakers find themselves in a rush to finish an ambitious legislative agenda, including a deal to avert the fiscal cliff and a disaster relief package for states ravaged by Superstorm Sandy, which awaits approval by the Senate.

There might still be time to approve a fiscal cliff deal before Christmas, and negotiations remain in progress: On Monday, House Speaker John Boehner met at the White House with President Barack Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. But with those high-stakes negotiations sucking the oxygen out of Capitol Hill, other measures might stagnate in the meantime, thus necessitating work during the week between Christmas and the new year.

Obama has long-supported the Assault Weapons Ban, but the White House can't point to anything he has done to make it a reality.

View Video ›

Image by

From cars for the FBI to salmon research, bill's spending would go far and wide. And not all of it is related to the storm's devastation.

Image by Spencer Platt / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — The Senate has quietly tucked hundreds of millions of dollars to fund parochial needs into a $60 billion supplemental spending measure ostensibly aimed at aiding victims of Hurricane Sandy, with new items ranging from aid for fisheries in Alaska to new cars for the FBI.

Although much of the spending — like $2 million for the Smithsonian to repair roofs and other buildings damaged during the storm — is directly linked to Sandy, huge parts of the bill would spend money on previous natural disasters and projects that at best have anything to do with emergency needs at all, critics say.

For instance, the supplemental includes more than $8 million in money for cars, furniture and office equipment for the Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, and other federal agencies — all of which the federal government says were damaged during Sandy.

But the spending doesn’t stop there or in funding to assist New Jersey, New York, and other states and local governments in recovering from the devastation.

Alaska Sen. Mark Begich successfully included $150 million in spending for fisheries in Alaska, New England, and the Gulf of Mexico that would assist communities reliant on the fishing industry.

“The failure of Chinook returns in 2010, 2011 and 2012 had a devastating impact on commercial and subsistence fisheries in Alaska,” Begich said in a statement. “These much-needed funds will help make communities whole and hopefully help fund research on factors affecting Chinook returns.”

Begich also included an additional $56.8 million in spending to help clean up debris from the 2011 tsunami that crippled Japan.

Other projects are even more tangentially connected. For instance, Taxpayers for Common Sense notes that the Senate included $336 million for an Amtrak program that has been in the planning stages for years.

Conservatives point to a host of other questionable provisions, including $13 billion in mitigation funding for future disasters, not directed to Sandy victims for emergency relief; $110 million in Safe Water Drinking Act Grants; $4 million for the Kennedy Space Center; $58 million in funding for private forestland owners to replace damaged trees; and $62 million for repairs to NOAA facilities and aircraft and weather forecasting equipment, among others.

The measure has already drawn strong opposition from Heritage Action and the Club for Growth, two influential conservative organizations that have denounced the measure for being loaded down with what they view as pork projects.

In a release sent out Monday, the Club warned lawmakers they would be scoring their votes, arguing that “when a natural disaster occurs, there is a textbook response by Congress — they cobble together an overpriced bill that isn't paid for, there's no accountability or oversight, and it's filled with pork. This proposal is no different.”

In an ongoing dispute, editors have informed American Express that they are contesting charges from the campaign trail.

Nine news outlets that covered the election sent a joint letter Monday to former Romney campaign officials to contest expenses billed to their reporters.

BuzzFeed, which is among the outlets that signed the letter, first reported on the dispute last week.

The outlets are requesting that the campaign provide a specific price breakdown for every event that cost them $200 or more. Until then, the letter reads, "some of our organizations have alerted American Express that we are contesting these charges."

The letter was sent to former campaign manager Matt Rhoades, and senior advisers Kevin Madden, Stuart Stevens, Beth Myers, Eric Fehrnstrom, and Russ Schriefer, among others.

Here's the letter:

To: Romney For President campaign
From: Members of the Romney press corps

To Whom It May Concern:

We’ve dealt with numerous campaigns over the past decades and understand that we pay a premium to travel with a candidate. But recent invoices from your campaign have raised serious questions about the charges you have forwarded to us for travel with Mitt Romney.

We are not quibbling over charter flights or hotel bills. We are focused on what appear to be exorbitant charges for food, filing centers/holds and ground transportation.

Some examples: $745 per person charged for a vice presidential debate viewing party on Oct. 11; $812 charged for a meal and a hold on Oct. 18; $461 for a meal and hold the next day; $345 for food and hold Oct. 30.

These costs far exceed typical expenses on the campaign trail. Also, it was clear to all present that the campaign’s paid staff frequently consumed the food and drinks ostensibly produced for the media. Were any of the costs of these events charged to the campaign itself, to cover the care and feeding of its staff? We would like to see how exactly the costs were determined for any specific event above $200, including the amounts you were charged and to whom you in turn assessed charges.

We have similar concerns about ground transportation costs, which at times exceeded $1,000 a day and were far higher per capita than what the campaign charged during the primaries--despite the larger numbers of reporters, photographers and television crews travelling and dividing the costs. One news organization contacted two of the bus agencies used by the campaign; it was clear from their reporting that the costs you charged us far outdistanced what you paid for the transportation.

In order to travel with the candidate, reporters were required to agree to costs in advance without knowing specifically what those costs would be. The trade-off in any such agreement is that the campaign will not exceed the normal bounds of propriety in charging news organizations. In this case, that is seriously in question.

Some of our organizations have alerted American Express that we are contesting these charges. We look forward to your response.

Cathleen Decker
Campaign 2012 Editor
Los Angeles Times

Jerry Seib
Washington Bureau Chief
The Wall Street Journal
Dow Jones Newswires

Richard Stevenson
Political Editor
New York Times

Paul Singer
Politics Editor
USA Today

David Millikin
Director for North America
Agence France-Presse

Kevin Merida
National Editor
Washington Post

Beth Fouhy
Senior Editor, Politics and National News
Yahoo

McKay Coppins
Political editor
BuzzFeed

Richard McGregor
Washington Bureau Chief
Financial Times

With Rep. Tim Scott moving to the Senate, a special election for his seat is on the horizon.

Image by Mike Segar / Reuters

WASHINGTON — With Rep. Tim Scott having been named to succeed Sen. Jim DeMint in the Senate, the scramble for his safely Republican House seat is on.

Although primaries for the special election won't be held for a few months, rumors and wish lists are already circulating within the state's political firmament, and it appears the state party will permit a crowded field.

Here, five Republicans who might run:

Joe McKeown

Source: timscott1

Joe McKeown has worked as Rep. Tim Scott's chief of staff since February, but has known him much longer: since both served concurrently on the Charleston County Council. Now, McKeown has emerged as a likely candidate to run to replace his boss. "If he were to get an endorsement from Tim, obviously that would be a big deal," said one state Republican aide. But Scott might choose to steer clear of the primary fray, making for a more competitive race for McKeown.

View Entire List ›

The court, however, has allowed the same-sex couples who brought the case to refile their case by identifying the specific benefits sought.

Gay and lesbian couples can marry in Washington and several other states, but Montana same-sex couples were dealt a setback in a Montana Supreme Court fight for equal benefits on Monday.

Image by Elaine Thompson / AP

Same-sex couples in Montana—which has a constitutional amendment prohibiting them from marrying—were denied a request for equal benefits by the state's supreme court on Monday, although the court left open the possibility of a future ruling that could grant at least some of the sought benefits.

The Montana Supreme Court, in a 4-3 decision, rejected a request by six same-sex couples to be given equal benefits to married opposite-sex couples in the state because the couples' argument that the state's entire "statutory scheme" should be found unconstitutional was too broad of a request.

Instead, Chief Justice Mike McGrath wrote, "It is this Court’s opinion that Plaintiffs should be given the opportunity, if they choose to take it, to amend the complaint and to refine and specify the general constitutional challenges they have proffered."

This is so, McGrath wrote, because "[b]roadly determining the constitutionality of a 'statutory scheme' that may, according to Plaintiffs, involve hundreds of separate statutes, is contrary to established jurisprudence," in a decision issued Monday. "These are important issues and should be decided only after the statutes involved are specifically identified and specifically analyzed in district court proceedings."

Three justices disagreed with the decision, with one—Justice James C. Nelson—strongly voicing his objections in a lengthy dissenting opinion.

Invoking what he called the "notorious" Supreme Court decisions of Dred Scott v. Sandford and Plessy v. Ferguson, Nelson stated, "While I have not always agreed with this Court’s decisions—in fact, I have strenuously disagreed with my colleagues on occasion—I have never disagreed more strongly with the Court as I do in this case. With due respect, I believe today’s decision, like those mentioned above, wrongly deprives an abused minority of their civil rights."

The two other justices who dissented from the court's opinion, Justices Patricia O. Cotter and Michael E. Wheat did not go as far in their view of the majority's decision as did Justice Nelson. Cotter wrote that she "would not liken the Court’s approach here to cases sanctioning slavery and racial segregation" and added that she "do[es] not believe [the court's majority] is acting in bad faith." Wheat joined her opinion.

One of the three justices joining McGrath's opinion for the court would have gone further than McGrath, however, with Justice Jim Rice writing that the state's constitutional amendment rendered same-sex couples constitutionally unequal to opposite-sex couples.

Referring to the amendment, Rice wrote, "With its passage, the law’s historical designation of marriage as between a man and a woman—and the exclusive treatment premised thereon—became an expressly constitutional classification."

As such, Rice continued, "Under the law, discussed below, marriage between a man and woman is a unique relationship, dissimilar to all other relationships and alone essential to the nation’s foundation and survival, and the State errs neither by recognizing it as such nor by giving it exclusive treatment. In sum, it is not discrimination to treat uniquely that which is unique."

The case was brought on behalf of the six couples by the American Civil Liberties Union.

Montana Supreme Court's Donaldson Decision