The Supreme Court is expected to finally release its decisions in two highly anticipated same-sex marriage cases Wednesday morning, wading into the controversial issue of gay marriage for the first time in the court’s history.

The justices could use the cases to issue a broad ruling guaranteeing the right to marriage to same-sex couples–or to shut down gay rights advocates’ claims of wrongful exclusion from the institution of marriage altogether.

The nine justices waited until the final day of the term to release opinions in the two cases—Perry v. Hollingsworth and Windsor v.United States.

At 9:00 a.m., the experts at SCOTUSblog—SCOTUS stands forSupreme Court of the United States—will begin analyzing what the Court might do in the liveblog below, and when a decision is handed down, this liveblog will likely be the first place to break the news.

In the Perry case, the court is expected decide whether California voters discriminated against gay people when they voted to ban same-sex marriage in 2008. In Windsor, the court is weighing whether the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act—which limits all federal marriage benefits to opposite sex couples–violates the constitutional rights of same-sex couples. The justices could also dodge the issue in one or both cases, instead deciding them on technical or procedural grounds.

AMSTERDAM: President Vladimir Putin defended Russia’s treatment of homosexuals on Monday in Amsterdam, where 1,000 gay rights activists waved pink and orange balloons and blasted out dance music to press home their protest.

Western nations need Russia for energy and as a market for exports but are uneasy about Putin’s human rights policies and his treatment of opponents in his new Kremlin term.

Putin’s visit to the Netherlands and Germany, Moscow’s biggest trade partners in Europe, also comes at an awkward time after a wave of state inspections of foreign-funded non-governmental organizations in Russia that has been much criticized abroad.

In Amsterdam, Dutch and Russian companies signed a batch of energy deals and Putin met Queen Beatrix and Prime Minister Mark Rutte, while around 1,000 protesters blew whistles, played loud music, and waved the gay pride flag nearby in the city famous for its liberal attitude.

Putin, who laughed off a topless protest earlier in the day in Germany, said Russia did not discriminate against gay people.

“In the Russian Federation – so that it is clear to everybody – there is no infringement on the rights of sexual minorities,” he said.

“These people, like everyone else, enjoy all the same rights and freedoms as everyone else,” he told a news conference – held at Amsterdam’s Maritime Museum in a nod to the days when Peter the Great worked as a young man in an Amsterdam shipyard.

Russia’s parliament has given preliminary approval to a ban on “homosexual propaganda” targeting minors, which critics say would effectively ban gay rights demonstrations. The United States has said the legislation “severely restricts freedom of expression and assembly”.

Many houses and bridges in the historic canal district of Amsterdam were draped with banners and the rainbow flag of the gay pride movement, protesting about what human rights organizations say is institutional repression of gays in Russia.

“Putin go homo,” read one, echoing the message “Putin go home” on the front page of Friday’s NRC Next daily newspaper.

“I’m protesting against the anti-gay law in Russia because it’s unreal. You can’t tell people to go back into the closet,” said one protester, who gave his name as Connie Feather, dressed in a rainbow striped chiffon dress and blue feather boa.

Earlier, in Germany, three members of the women’s rights group Femen, which has protested against Russia’s detention of the feminist punk band Pussy Riot around Europe, disrupted his visit to a trade fair in the German city of Hanover.

They stripped to the waist and shouted slogans calling Putin a “dictator” before being bundled away by security men.

“Regarding this performance, I liked it,” grinned Putin at a joint news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. “I did not catch what they were shouting, I did not even see if they were blondes, brunettes or chestnut-haired …”

PARIS: Paris police used tear gas and batons to fight crowds who pushed their way onto the landmark Champs-Elysees avenue and toward the presidential palace as part of a huge protest against a draft law allowing same-sex couples to marry and adopt children.

Hundreds of thousands of people — conservative activists, schoolchildren with their parents, retirees, priests — converged on the capital Sunday in a last-ditch bid to stop the bill, many bused in from the French provinces.

The violence took protesters and police by surprise, and suggested that the anti-gay marriage protests have become outlets for anger and disappointment in the presidency of Francois Hollande’s presidency.

The lower house of France’s parliament approved the “marriage for everyone” bill last month with a large majority, and it’s facing a vote in the Senate next month. Both houses are dominated by Hollande’s Socialist Party and its allies.

Sustained protests led by opposition conservatives in this traditionally Catholic country have eroded support for the draft law in recent months, and organizers hope Sunday’s march will swing the Senate debate against it.

The first few hours of the protest were peaceful. But as it was meant to be winding down, about 100 youths tried to push past police barricades onto the Champs-Elysees, a tree-lined avenue that cuts through central Paris and draws throngs of tourists daily. In an indication of the sensitivity of the issue, protesters had been barred from marching on the Champs.

Police officers wrangled with the youths, some with shaven heads and others wearing hoods or masks, and fired tear gas to force them back. Gaining momentum, more and more protesters took side streets to reach the avenue, blocking a key intersection — and some made it within 100 meters (yards) from the grounds of the president’s Elysee Palace.

Police fired more tear gas, primarily at aggressive youths at the front of the crowd. Protesters of all ages were among those coughing and clutching their stinging eyes.

“Hollande, Resignation!” they chanted, before breaking into the French anthem, “La Marseillaise.”

When Hollande took office in May, most voters supported the idea of gay marriage and few expected it to face much of a challenge. But disillusionment with the president’s failure to stem rising unemployment or revive the economy — a much bigger concern for the French — have fueled resentment at the “marriage for everyone” bill.

An official with the Paris police headquarters said two people were arrested and no injuries were reported in Sunday’s clashes. The police official was not authorized to be publicly named in accordance with police policy.

The official estimated that 300,000 people took part in Sunday’s march, slightly less than a similar march in January. Organizers estimated some 1.4 million people took part in Sunday’s march, more than in the January protest.

Polls indicate a shrinking majority of French voters back gay marriage, which is legal in about a dozen mostly European nations and some U.S. states. But polls show French voters are less enthusiastic about adoption by same-sex couples.

Frigide Barjot, the stage name of an activist who has led protests against the bill, insisted the anti-gay marriage movement wasn’t a lost cause, declaring: “It’s the second round, sir. It’s not the last battle.”

LONDON: A bill to legalize same-sex marriage in Britain cleared a major hurdle Tuesday, as lawmakers voted overwhelmingly in favor of the proposals championed by Prime Minister David Cameron.

The vote in the House of Commons — 400 to 175 in support of the proposed legislation — will be followed by more detailed parliamentary debates. The proposals also require the approval of the House of Lords before they become law.

The process could take months, but if approved, the bill is expected to take effect in 2015 and enable same-sex couples to get married in both civil and religious ceremonies, provided the religious institution consents. The bill also lets couples who had previously entered into civil partnerships convert their relationship into a marriage.

“Tonight’s vote shows Parliament is very strongly in favor of equal marriage,” Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said. “I genuinely believe that we will look back on today as a landmark for equality in Britain.”

The lopsided vote was a qualified victory for Cameron, with around half of his party’s lawmakers rejecting the proposals or abstaining. Nonetheless, strong support from the left-leaning Labour Party and Liberal Democrats party ensured the Commons approval.

After the ballots were counted, Cameron acknowledged that “strong views exist on both sides,” but said the result was a “step forward for our country.”

Officials have stressed that all religious organizations can decide for themselves if they want to “opt in” to holding gay weddings. However, the Church of England, the country’s official faith, is barred from performing such ceremonies.

That provision aims to ensure that the Church, which opposes gay marriage, is protected from legal claims that as the official state religion it must marry anyone who requests it.

Currently, same-sex couples only have the option of a civil partnership, which offers the same legal rights and protections on issues such as inheritance, pensions, and child maintenance.

Supporters say that gay relationships should be treated exactly the same way as heterosexual ones, but critics worry that the proposals would change long-standing views about the meaning of marriage. Some Conservatives also fear the proposals would cost the party a significant number of votes in the next general election.

“Marriage is the union between a man and a woman, has been historically, remains so. It is Alice in Wonderland territory, Orwellian almost, for any government of any political persuasion to seek to come along and try to re-write the lexicon,” Conservative lawmaker Roger Gale said.

The bill’s provisions apply only to England and Wales — there are no plans for similar legislation in Northern Ireland. Scotland is considering introducing a similar bill.