It's technical.
Posted on 11/18/2008 8:22:44 PM PST by goldstategop
Six months ago, California's highest court discarded its reputation for caution and ended the state's ban on same-sex marriage.
Now the moderately conservative state Supreme Court is being asked to take an even riskier step -- to overturn the November voter initiative that reinstated the marriage ban and possibly provoke a voter revolt that could eject one or more of the justices from the bench.
The court is under intense pressure from all sides. Its first response to the challenges may come today, when the justices meet privately in a weekly conference to decide which cases to accept for review.
Legal scholars say case law does not give the court a clear path for overturning the voter-approved measure. The state high court -- six Republicans and one moderate Democrat -- generally defers to the will of the people. Only twice has the court rejected initiatives on the legal grounds cited by opponents of Proposition 8.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
“the moderately conservative state Supreme Court”
Journalists are maroons.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
I think the media is trying to create this perception on purpose, in hopes that the court will react to it. That’s how they can just disregard that this “conservative” court already once overturned the will of the people. The MSM is using this tactic a lot more, and it’s effective.
“Newspapers” in their final death throes attempting to spread leftist propaganda.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Easy - - by judicial fiat, aka, liberal activism.
Better get used to it because this steaming pantload Obama will be making nominations for the next four years.
Hang on, it's going to be a bumpy ride....
2banana wrote: “How can a State Supreme Court find part of that State’s Constitution unconstitutional?????”
Actually it is done often across the country when someone presents a constitutional challenge. Of course just because a constitutional challenge is made doesn’t mean the Sup Crt will agree. I am suprised they didn’t do this before. I have never read the California constitution so God only knows what it says. My guess with all of the propositons they vote on all of the time that the California constitution is easily changed unlike other states and that whoever writes these proposals up for vote keeps them wide open so these attacks can be made.
Regardless of the court decision, yeah, nay, or pass, all hell will break loose. My hunch is the court will either pass on a decision, or find in favor of prop 8. Then the majority members will be attacked relentlessly by gay activists for months.
It actually WAS a conservative court until the departure of Janice Rogers Brown who Bush appointed to the Second (?) District Court.
The proponents ultimately decide the exact wording of the Propositions.
Except the title, which moobeam manipulated to imply gays had the right to marry and prop 8 was going to take that "right" away.
From the article: “The issue before the court is technical: whether Proposition 8 amounted to a sweeping revision of the state Constitution, which can be put on the ballot only by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature or a constitutional convention, or whether it was a more limited amendment, as its backers contended. Proposition 8 reached the ballot after a petition drive.” That provision is also part of the state constitution. If the court holds rolling back their decision that gay marriage is OK is a sweeping change they can do what they want. A gay marriage ban would never get approval of 2/3s of the California legislature. It would be easier to get 2/3 approval for gay marriage given the liberal tilt of both houses here. Of course if the court wants to make sweeping changes there is no requirement for a 2/3 vote or a constitutional convention. To go back to the status quo anti before their flawed decision shouldn’t be a sweeping change since that’s been the accepted norm since long before the founding of the country let alone the creation of the state of California; but that won’t stop them. All we’d do is run them out of office if they did over turn Prop 8. God alone knows what the opponents will do to them personally and professionally and to their families if they don’t over turn it. Blackmail is probably only the first step in their efforts to get it overturned.
Actually the CA constitution says we can amend it in several ways and one of the ways is by voter initiative. The queers are trying to say that this wasn't an amendment, which it certainly was, and was a revision,which it certainly wasn't, which would require a vote by the legislature. There is no way they could find this is not an amendment if they go by law, if they go by "feelings" then they might dump it, but then they will find themselves up for recall or voted out next election, as simple as that.
The court already signed off on the initiative before the election, they are going to have a hard time saying that all of a sudden they have decided it isn't an amendment when before the election it was an amendment.
No, the CA constitution is not easily changed, most props are not amendments to the constitution, it takes a huge battle before the election to get an initiative approved as an amendment change, it was quite a fight this time.
ANY of these so-called “justices” that vote to advance this defiance of the people that elected them should be recalled ASAP - and any Californian that fails to support this recall is a slave to the State.
(A former californian)
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.