Top Court In California Will Review Proposition 8 (New York Times Sounds Disappointed Alert)

New York Times ^ | 11/20/2008 | Jesse McKinley

[Hugin]

The California constitution allows for “Amendments” to be placed on the ballot by initive, like Prop 8. “Revisions” must be placed on the ballot by 2/3 of the legislature. The suit says it should have been a revision, not and amendment, so it’s not legally part of the constitution. The court has decided twice before in the last 100 years that constitutional ammendments voted on were extensive enough to be revisions and overturned them.

[Tax Government]

That’s right; thanks for the confirmation. The appellate court doesn’t decide fact.

[goldstategop]

Amendments can be initiated either by the State Legislature or by the voters. Revisions can be initiated only by the State Legislature or a constitutional convention convened for that purpose.

"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

[Seaplaner]

Marxists/socialists/Democrats/”news”persons just hate that will-of-the-people vote thingie, don’t they?

[TBP]

the California Supreme Court said Wednesday that it would take up the case of whether a voter-approved ban on same-sex unions was constitutional.

Hello? Isn't it a Constitutional amendment? How cna an amendment to teh Constitution be unconstitutional? Aside from the merits of the specific issue, does anyone see the dangerous precedent there? If we can just start declarign parts of the Constitution unconstitutional, then there go the last remaining rights that we have -- much to the glee of BO and his SS Corps.

[frog in a pot]

“The court has decided twice before in the last 100 years that constitutional amendments voted on were extensive enough to be revisions and overturned them.”

Thanks for pointing that out.

Prop 8 seems to simply confirm the long-held meaning of a common word. I am told it states in its entirety: Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

Pretty minimal and perhaps the exact opposite of extensive.

***********************************************************
Stand up America, the presidential election is not over!
We voted for electors not the individual candidates. The electors vote on or after December 15, 2009. The results are then presented to a Joint Congress and objections may be heard on January 6, 2009.
See the letter on my About page hand-delivered to the local offices of my Republican Senators and Representatives. I urge you to take similar action, even if it is simply mailing a one page letter to Washington, D.C.

[fishhound]

I can’t tell what ground they would have to decide against Prop8? I thought legal clarity was decided before the election.

Can you splain please? Thanks in Advance. lol

[Lancey Howard]

Maybe these judges... actually have some respect left for the rule of law, and legal processes...

LOL, yeah right!

[fishhound]

Hi;
I posted a question for you. I really would like to know how they SJ can reverse this ... by what possible reason.
Thanks