Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

The California Supreme Court announced this week it will hear arguments on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the state’s ban on same-sex marriage, in San Francisco on March 5.

The high court’s written ruling on whether the voter initiative should be struck down will be due 90 days later.

The measure, enacted by voters on Nov. 4, amended the state Constitution to provide that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

It overturned a decision in which the court said by a 4-3 vote in May that gay and lesbian couples have a constitutional right to marry. The panel is now considering three lawsuits filed by same-sex couples and a coalition of cities and counties to challenge the ban.

The lawsuits claim the measure is so sweeping it is a constitutional revision, which would require approval of two-thirds of the Legislature as well as a majority of voters. The court has said it will rule on both whether Proposition 8 is constitutional and, if so, whether it retroactively invalidates the estimated 18,000 same-sex marriages performed in California before Nov. 4.

The justices in today’s order allocated an unusual three hours for the arguments in their State Building courtroom beginning at 9 a.m. on March 5. Cases are normally allotted only half an hour per side.

Lawyers for each set of plaintiffs will each get 30 minutes. The plaintiff groups are six same-sex couples and a civil rights organization, Equality California; a seventh couple that filed a separate lawsuit; and 15 cities and counties led by the cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles and Santa Clara County.

The proponents of Proposition 8, represented by Pepperdine Law School Dean Kenneth Starr and Sacramento attorney Andrew Pugno, will have an hour to argue to the court. Starr and Pugno had asked for extra time because their clients are

the only party in the case fully defending Proposition 8.

In a surprise move, California Attorney General Jerry Brown, whose job is to defend the state’s constitution and laws, in December submitted arguments both for and against the measure and concluded that the court should strike it down.

Brown told the court in a filing that he doesn’t think that Proposition 8 is a constitutional revision or that it violates the constitutional separate of powers. But he said he believes it is unconstitutional because it violates the inalienable right to liberty. The court gave Brown 30 minutes, but instructed him to “divide his time between his arguments in support of, and his argument in opposition to, the validity of Proposition 8.”

Groups that filed friend-of-the-court briefs will not be given time to argue unless one of the official parties in the case agrees to give up part of its time.

At least 63 friend-of-the-court briefs were filed by individuals and coalitions of groups, some representing dozens of other organizations,

including religious groups, law professors, business groups, labor organizations and civil rights groups. Twenty of the friend-of-the-court briefs supported Proposition 8, while 43 favored striking it down.

Kate Kendell, legal director of the San Francisco-based National Center for Lesbian Rights, which filed the first lawsuit on behalf of same-sex couples, said, “Proposition 8 represents a tremendous threat to the rights of every minority group in California.”

Kendell said, “As our legal team prepares for oral argument before the California Supreme Court, we are hopeful that the court will end the short life of this draconian measure.”

Pugno and Starr have argued in court filings that Proposition 8 represents the will of the people and is well within the initiative power.

They wrote in their final brief last month, “Proposition 8 is a moderate measure that represents a deeply rooted, multigenerational judgment of the people of California about the definition of marriage.”

–Julia Cheever, Bay City News

–Julia Cheever, Bay City News

Join the Conversation

4 Comments

  1. I know how Proposition work! Both sides spent $90M total in lobbying the public. The voters have spoken. Yet, we want to spend more $’s to fight the outcome of the Proposition voting. It’s a circus! If a group doesn’t like the outcome, a lawsuit gets filed. Why do we bother have any proposition? This issue is a hot potato. If you speak up against it, you are bad. If you speak for it, you are bad. I say, let it be. The voters have spoken and let the issue lie where it is. If we set a precedence on this, lets not bother with anymore propositions! Someone can always come up with a legal argument against whatever the outcome! We can save our precious $’s in today’s economy and put it to good use, like helping the hungry or provide more medical clinic services. Enough is Enough!

  2. I know how Proposition work! Both sides spent $90M total in lobbying the public. The voters have spoken. Yet, we want to spend more $’s to fight the outcome of the Proposition voting. It’s a circus! If a group doesn’t like the outcome, a lawsuit gets filed. Why do we bother have any proposition? This issue is a hot potato. If you speak up against it, you are bad. If you speak for it, you are bad. I say, let it be. The voters have spoken and let the issue lie where it is. If we set a precedence on this, lets not bother with anymore propositions! Someone can always come up with a legal argument against whatever the outcome! We can save our precious $’s in today’s economy and put it to good use, like helping the hungry or provide more medical clinic services. Enough is Enough!

  4. Yeah, YT, the majority should be able impose its will on the minority, no matter what the consequences!

    Of course, it would have been nice (and saved both sides lots of $) if this Supreme Court hearing had happened _before_ the election.

  8. The basic rights of a minority of people should NEVER be up for a vote. Don’t you see that human nature is to oppress and control people who are not exactly like you? Can we move past this kind of behavior now? Pleeeeaaaaaase???? I want to belong to a human race that is better than we are behaving with this Prop 8 stuff. Prop 8 can and will be overturned. It’s not about the will of the majority. We have the obligation to protect those who cannot protect themselves.

    And, if we really don’t want to go in the direction of betterment, then I propose a Proposition that bans the marriage of ugly or stupid heterosexual people. Because, those marriages really do have consequences that the rest of us have to live with.

    Peace.

  9. Wow! What emotions! Millions have been spent on both sides. More millions will be spend fighting in the courts. What is the point of having any propositions or even amendment to the ‘constitution’. One can always challenge it in the courts. Even an amendment can be challenged – just needs 2/3 vote to carry and a lot more money! So, we guarantee lawyers full employment for eternity while the poor and less fortunate suffer as (high profile) lawyers dine in luxury, lodge in fancy hotels, and fly first class to/from court sessions! And fraternize within the legal system!

    This is the beauty of United States. There is always another battle to fight as the economy goes deeper into depression. Maybe there is bailout money to fund these court actions too!

  10. This hate should have never reached the ballot. Where is the seperation of church and state?
    I hope prop 8 is overturned, otherwise its a frightening direction we are headed. History tells what happens when a religion is allowed too much power.

    I’m not gay but I find that prop 8 hitting the ballot scary, whos rights will be on the ballot next? Mine? My childrens? Yours?

  11. I have two questions for ‘Perfect World’.
    You said “Don’t you see that human nature is to oppress and control people who are not exactly like you”??? Is that part of Human Nature? How do you come to THAT conclusion? I am aware that human history is filled with injustices…but to take that leap and say its IN OUR NATURE as humans to oppress is a wild assumption. Maybe you should stick to stating your own opinion, and not speak for ALL humans.
    You also said ” We have the obligation to protect those who cannot protect themselves”… Who are we protecting, and why can’t they defend themselves? Are you referring to ‘gays’? Aren’t you belittling them and insinuating that they (as a group) are not equal to straight people? Give them some credit. If you want to fight the battle WITH them, good. You shouldn’t see it as you are fighting the battle FOR THEM…

  12. For ?

    Seriously, you have got to be kidding me if you do not see that groups of humans over the course of history constantly try to oppress one another. I am just saying that there must be some biological drive to cause us as a society to do this sort of thing.

    I am not belittling in any way when I say that we must protect those who cannot protect themselves. Obviously persons who would be involved in a same sex marriage are not the majority of the population so if things such as prop 8 are put on the ballot how can a minority get the majority of the vote? Only if the rest of us do what is just. Thats all we need to do, throw this crap out of the courts and allow anyone who wants to get married to do so.

    Maybe the backers of the ban on same sex marriages could put the same time, energy and money into fixing the crappy state of heterosexual marriages. 50% fail, and the rest of us pay the price dealing with their messed up kids.

    It’s just amazing to me that anyone really cares who gets married to one another. Amazing.

  13. Geeeze, what a waste of time & money. The proposition was put to a vote, it passed, JUST ACCEPT IT ALREADY. I didn’t vote for Obama but I’m not fighting against the fact he won. That’s what the majority wanted so be it.

  15. “That’s what the majority wanted so be it. ”

    So if the majority of the people vote to take away your rights then that’s fine too? I am sure we could start some hateful campaign to take something away from you.

    The majority has no right to make these decisions. We will win in court and the world will be a better place for the progress. You haters will die sad and unhappy. It’s the only good reason you have for your views. You are miserable so you want everyone else to be.

  16. What’s next? The mother marries her son? The father marries his daughter? Why are we excluding those marriages???

    Because it’s WRONG! And who among us determine that it’s wrong? The majority of the people in this society.

    I’m sitting on the fence on the prop 8 issue but I strongly support the “majority rules” concept. It’s the essence of a democratic society.

    Peace!

  18. If 2 same-sex humans want to make a union, go ahead and do it. That race will become extinct. Don’t rely on the heterosexuals to reproduce for them so more of them will continue. One cannot have the cake and eat it at the same time. Amen!

  19. Nivana said: “Don’t rely on the heterosexuals to reproduce for them so more of them will continue.”

    The problem is that these people ARE allowed to adopt children and raise them as homosexuals. So they are already relying on heterosexuals to reproduce for them.

    If nature truly intended for people of the same sex to form a union, as they often claim, then nature should have given every human being 2 sets of reproductive organs, that of a man and a woman.

    Oops! Did I just imply a man and a woman is what nature intended??? Shame on me!

  20. Does anybody know the names of the people who gave money for Yes on 8? I want to post a few flyers around so everybody can identify the sickies.

  26. It is absolutely pathetic that names of people who feel strongly about an issue are being named in newspapers. Didn’t newspapers in the south at one time publish names of young black men accused (usually falsely accused) of crimes so the lynch mobs wouldn’t be bored on some Saturday night. This is no different. When will they start publishing the names, hometowns and amount owed for deadbeat parents? Or, hey, what about listing divorces like they do marriages?
    Absolutely pathetic.

  28. What these losers (as the vote goes) don’t seem to understand is that their sleazy hateful games in trying to intimidate pro-8 folks by naming local names doesn’t make any sense as:

    1) It turns people off so it’s counter productive.

    2) It also would cause the exposure, publishing, boycott, etc in the other direction. There are some local anti-8 sole proprietors, real estate folks, chiros, computer techs, etc who could easily be named and economically harmed as well.

    What a pathetic and weak-minded exercise.

  30. I don’t get it? Why is it BAD for anyone to be on the list? If you believe in something, enough to donate your hard earned cash…Why should anyone be ashamed? What happened to people “saying what you believe”…and “believing what you say”?
    I say if you donated…be proud that you were on the winning side this time. If you cared enough to donate 5-10-even 20 Thousand dollars….then you must feel really stong about the topic. You should want to defend your beliefs…don’t get scared NOW…

  32. “I’m sitting on the fence on the prop 8 issue but I strongly support the “majority rules” concept. It’s the essence of a democratic society.”

    Majority rules is not the essence of a democratic society. In fact, no civil rights issue has ever been resolved with the “concept” as you call it. Perhaps one of those smart kids from Amador can school you in the area of the Constitution, Bill of Rights and plain ol’ democracy in general. Majority rules is not how it works. I am sure you are fine with that because you are probably part of the majority, and well, yeah, it works for the majority. Sometimes the majority is not very smart and thankfully we have a judicial system that will – eventually – protect us from the will of the majority.
    God is pretend and the bible is just a book, please stop trying to make up rules for all of us based on your fairy tales. You should try to practice what you preach just a little bit instead.

    Thank you.

  33. Who by the way is “for all”? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm…

    Again, I would like to offer an olive branch to the donors in suppport of Prop. 8…creeps!

Leave a comment