Posted on 11/05/2008 1:46:32 PM PST by SmithL
SAN FRANCISCO -- After a heated, divisive campaign fueled by a record $73 million of spending, California voters have approved Proposition 8, which would change the state Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. Opponents promptly filed suit to try to block the measure from taking effect.
With 96 percent of the vote counted, Prop. 8 was winning by a decisive 400,000-vote margin, 52.2 percent to 47.8 percent. It piled up huge margins in the Central Valley and carried some Democratic strongholds such as Los Angeles County. The measure lost in every Bay Area county but Solano.
As the vote counting continued this morning, opponents of Prop. 8 filed a lawsuit directly with the state Supreme Court - whose May 15 ruling legalized same-sex marriage - asking the justices to overturn the measure.
The suit argued that Prop. 8 would change the California Constitution in such fundamental ways - taking important rights away from a minority group - that it amounted to a constitutional revision, which requires approval by the Legislature before being submitted to the voters. The case was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, Lamda Legal and the National Center for Lesbian Rights.
The same groups asked the court before the election to remove Prop. 8 from the ballot on those grounds. The justices refused, but left the door open for a post-election challenge.
"A major purpose of the Constitution is to protect minorities from majorities," said Elizabeth Gill, an ACLU lawyer. "Because changing that principle is a fundamental change to the organizing principles of the Constitution itself, only the Legislature can initiative such revisions."
The suit was filed on behalf of six unmarried same-sex couples and the gay rights group Equality California.
Passage of Prop. 8 leaves more than just the future of same-sex marriage up in the air. Questions have...been raised about whether...
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
As long as it doesn’t jive with the ACLU agenda.
Here come da judge!
Thank you for making the argument I’ve been making! Any eligible man can marry any eligible woman. Everyone has the same restrictions (age, marital status, not a close relative of the spouse, etc.). These are special, invented “rights.”
Now that’s ridiculous. This proposition was simply about keeping the definition of marriage between a man and woman the same. Nothing else.
Certainly nothing to do with race. I mean, if that was the case, why did 70% of blacks vote for it?
They will simply DO it. The California state bureaucracy (the public masters) will spring into action immediately and issue licenses and other state documents. Jerry Moonbeam Brown will refuse to defend the amendment or appeal to SCOTUS. Private groups will have to organize and finance the appeal, SCOTUS will decide.
How can a referendum be overturned by a court? Isn't that the whole point? Doesn't it carry the de facto weight of an amendment? Shouldn't state authorities refuse to obey any ruling regarding a referendum, citing separation of powers?
Here’s my question...
If Proposition 8 is a state constitutional change, making same sex marriage illegal under the CA constitution, wouldn’t that bind the state supreme court’s “hands” on the matter?
It seems to me that the CA state supreme court can rule something constitutional or unconstitutional: That’s it. Well, if this is an amendment to the state constitution, then it’s constitutional by definition.
It’s sort of like the SCOTUS ruling that free speech is unconstitutional... Oops... Wait a minute, been there, done that with McCain/Feingold.
Mark
And making more homosexuals.
The more there are the less they can be denied.
[And don’t tell me it can’t be done because they are borrrnnn that way. A few may be but the majority choose. No, YOU go research it. ]
But clearly they must have known how the blacks felt about it and so tried to stir up a little race hatred with them and make it a black vs. white issue.
Gay marriage would be a slap in the face to God, that is what liberals want to do, take God from society, THAT is what is making me mad. GOD created marriage and it was only between a man and a woman. End of story. Liberals are a growing fungus in society.
Homosexuals have exactly the same marriage rights as anybody else. Any male homosexual can marry any female homosexual.
Absolutely right. I had a conversation with my wife urging her to vote for just such an amendment here in Florida and for basically this very reason. This argument that a definition of marriage is not equally applied if it is specific to a man and a woman is certainly ridiculous. Just consider that we also define what a doctor is, or an airplane pilot, and nobody has any problem with all the people excluded in these definitions. People like the stupid, lazy, poor who can't afford to go to classes, retarded people, the insane, and so on. My feeling is if it is discriminatory to define marriage as being between a man and a woman, then I have the right to go to work as a heart surgeon tomorrow.
the argument is that this is a “fundamental right” and only the legislature can put that on the ballot.
If this was the case, then NOTHING would ever get on the ballot.
They have no standing to go to SCOTUS. Gays are not a protected class, and regulation of marriage is one of the enumerated state powers under the Constitution.
I have to ask - did a single pro gay marriage ballot initiative pass last night?
If the CASU usurps the will of the people on this, there should be no less than a revolution! Californian’s do not let them stop you under ANY circumstances!
The problem is that the left uses our civil behavior against us. This happens all the time. The left knows we don’t riot and take up weaponry against them. If the CA Supreme Court and the legislature continue to overturn the will of the people that is tyranny, plain and simple.
We should sue about the Presidential election since apparently the voice of the people isn’t enough for liberals.
It’s tyranny over the people. I wish people would see it for what it is.
They need to be brought and voted on for exactly the reason we’re seeing: tyranny.
It IS an amendment to the California Constitution. The California Supreme clowns cannot say it’s unconstitutional when it AMENDS that document. The other arguments about it were demolished PRIOR TO the election when a lawsuit against it was dismissed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.