This just in!
The state Supreme Court refused to come to the aid of California’s embattled ban on same-sex marriage Wednesday, denying a conservative group’s request to order Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown to appeal a federal judge’s ruling striking down the voter-approved measure.
The state officials’ decision not to argue in support of Proposition 8 has raised questions about whether anyone is legally qualified to defend it in court. The Pacific Justice Institute filed suit last week, arguing that the California Constitution requires Brown to defend the state’s laws.
A state appeals court dismissed the suit without a hearing, and the state’s high court denied review Wednesday without comment.
It will now be up to a federal appeals court, and possibly the U.S. Supreme Court, to decide whether Prop. 8’s sponsors have legal standing…
Inserted from <San Francisco Chronicle>
Congrats to our LGBT friends.
14 Responses to “Breaking: California Supremes Deny Bigots on Prop 8”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
A smart move by the California Supreme Court. I am so weary of paranoid, antisocial conservative witch hunts. First blacks, then liberals, then immigrants, then gays and Muslims—who is next? Why don’t these idiots just learn to accept and get along with those not exactly like they are?
Jack, the Republicans carefull cultivate their hatred for political advantage. Othwerwise most would crawl back into the woodwork.
Meg Shitman has promised to defend it. So you know all the Klanservative Kalifornians will come out to support eBush come November.
Then we need the return of Governor Moonbeam.
Woo-hooo! Congrats to our LGBT friends. I hope the Feds and SCOTUS do the same thing! 😮
Lisa, In think SCOTUS will duck this one. They will wait in hopes of setting precedent, and thereby violating the Constitution, by overturning a decision that is not so well crafted.
It’s exactly that potential scenario that tempers my enthusiasm WRT this ruling.
It will be a long time before we are treated to such an extraordinarily well crafted ruling as
Federal District Court Judge Walker has accomplished: all the i’s were dotted and the t’s were crossed. It would be a shame to have this particular lawsuit end on the technicality of standing – it deserves to be decided on its merits.
In their stay order of several weeks ago the Ninth Circuit motions panel directed the proponents of Prop 8 (defendants) to address the standing question, which is only prudent given that Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and because it was raised by Judge Walker in his August 4th ruling and subsequent appeal for a stay by the defendants (i.e., supporters of Prop 8).
I’m encouraged by the fact that in a little noticed ruling, the same Ninth Circuit motions panel also consolidated and expedited an appeal to be granted standing by Imperial County (where Prop 8 garnered a whopping 70% support), raising the possibility that Imperial County could be found to have standing in the case.
It would seem that if the mention of standing in the first order indicates the judges of the Ninth were dubious about standing, the second order means the judges were thinking of a way out of the standing problem.
http://www.scotusblog.com/blog/2010/08/17/2d-prop-8-case-expedited/
The bottom line is that I personally would prefer to have the ruling of Judge Walker’s magnificently crafted decision work its way up the appeals process to be judged on its merits – and not become the final word because it’s truncated by a technical procedural issue.
Judge Walker has simply not given SCOTUS any wiggle room … if – and that’s a big “if” – they obey their oaths.
Thanks, Nameless, and I agree. I would also prefer to have Walker’s ruling become the precedent setting case, which is why I think SCOTUS will duck it. If I’m wrong, your if becomes paramount.
:: hoots ::
I’m relieved that the homophobes didn’t win this battle. Onward!
Amen, Ahab!
One good piece of news today. The other? The loony Florida pastor has called off the Koran burning. But now that he’s had a taste of fame, what will he come up with next?
Maybe, Leslie. See today’s lead article here.
No fair, no fair.
How about us monosexuals. No right at all, California or other.
We shy folk. Like Pee Wee Herman. Just sometimes like to go off by ourselves.
Ivan, for you monosexuals, we have Christine O’Donnell, GOP candidate for the nomination for Senator in Delaware. Part of her platform is opposition to masturbation. Thes she might consider Canadian masturbation an act of international terrorism. 😉