New York Times: “It was 10 minutes before 1 a.m. on Saturday, Sept. 21, 1996, and there
were no cameras, no ceremony. The witching-hour timing bespoke both
political calculation and personal angst. With his signature, federal
law now defined marriage as the union of a man and woman. Mr. Clinton
considered it a gay-baiting measure, but was unwilling to risk
re-election by vetoing it.”

“For nearly 17 years since, that middle-of-the-night moment has haunted Mr. Clinton, the source of tension with friends, advisers and gay rights supporters. He tried to explain, defend and justify. He asked for understanding. Then he inched away from it bit by bit. Finally this month, he disavowed the Defense of Marriage Act entirely, urging that the law be overturned by the Supreme Court, which takes up the matter on Wednesday on the second of two days of arguments devoted to same-sex marriage issues.”

“Rarely has a former president declared that an action he took in office violated the Constitution. But Mr. Clinton’s journey from signing the Defense of Marriage Act to repudiating it mirrors larger changes in society as same-sex marriage has gone from a fringe idea to one with a majority.”

“Less than four years ago, some gay-rights activists thought it would be a mistake to wage a Supreme Court battle over gay marriage. This week, the issue comes to the nine justices for nearly three hours of argument, and gay-marriage proponents are confident of at least a partial victory,” the Wall Street Journal reports.

“In a twist, the same fast-changing public opinion cited by activists has turned into the basis for one of the principal arguments at the Supreme Court by gay-marriage opponents. They say voters in some states have shown willingness to approve gay marriage, meaning there is no need for the justices to wade into the socially divisive issue. Nine states plus the District of Columbia have approved gay marriage–including three states in November 2012 votes.”

Ryan Teague Beckwith: A look at six Supreme Court precedents on marriage and gay rights.

David Hawkings: “For gays and lesbians, the marriage cases being debated at the Supreme Court this week hold the potential for either a landmark expansion or a painful contraction of their civil rights, some narrower changes, or really nothing meaningful at all. But for members of Congress — Republicans, in particular — their political lives will be shaped profoundly by whether the justices go big, go small or essentially stay home on the issue.”

Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) told Time that he supports same-sex marriage.

Said Warner: “I support marriage equality because it is the fair and right thing to do. Like many Virginians and Americans, my views on gay marriage have evolved, and this is the inevitable extension of my efforts to promote equality and opportunity for everyone.”

Warner is up for re-election in 2014.

The Cloakroom: The march towards legalizing gay marriage seems unstoppable, but is it?