Skip to comments.Kenneth W. Starr Joins Legal Defense of Proposition 8
Posted on 12/19/2008 5:37:36 PM PST by Fred
December 19, 2008
Today ProtectMarriage.com Yes on 8, filed written briefs with the California Supreme Court defending Prop. 8 against legal challenges. As you will recall, three anti-Prop 8 lawsuits were initiated by opponents the day after the measure passed in the November General Election.
We are excited to share with you that joining the legal defense of Proposition 8 is Kenneth W. Starr. Starr formerly served as a Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, and as U.S. Solicitor General, he argued twenty-five cases before the Supreme Court. He remains active in the professional and educational legal community. As lead counsel, Starr will argue the case before the California Supreme Court on behalf of Proposition 8s official proponents.
The legal challenges against Proposition 8 claim that the measure could not be added to the constitution by ballot initiative, but rather only by a constitutional revision, requiring either a two-thirds vote of the Legislature or a statewide Constitutional Convention. California has not had such a convention since the last one held in 1879.
We are confident that the will of the voters and Proposition 8 will ultimately be upheld. The addition of Dean Starr to this legal conversation will provide useful guidance for the Court in resolving these important issues.
Excerpts from todays legal filings include:
* Petitioners challenge depends on characterizing Proposition 8 as a radical departure from the fundamental principles of the California Constitution. [ ] But that portrayal is wildly wrong. Proposition 8 is limited in nature and effect. It does nothing more than restore the definition of marriage to what it was and always had been under California law before June 16, 2008 and to what the people had repeatedly willed that it be throughout Californias history. (Page 16.)
* Proposition 8s brevity is matched by its clarity. There are no conditional clauses, exceptions, exemptions, or exclusions: Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Its plain language encompasses both pre-existing and later-created same-sex (and polygamous) marriages, whether performed in California or elsewhere. With crystal clarity, it declares that they are not valid or recognized in California. (Page 37.)
Legal briefing by the parties will continue through January 2009. A hearing on the case could be held as early as March 2009.
Copies of the written briefs will be available online at the California Supreme Courts website:http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/highprofile/prop8.htm. The cases are Strauss v. Horton, S168047; City and County of San Francisco v. Horton, S168078; and Tyler v. State of California, S168066.
As we continue moving forward in defending Proposition 8 against these legal attacks, supporters are encouraged to donate to the Proposition 8 Legal Defense Fund. Your donations will go towards covering the legal expenses of protecting traditional marriage. Secure, private contributions (no public disclosure) can be made online, or by check mailed to:
Proposition 8 Legal Defense Fund PO Box 162849 Sacramento, CA 95816-2849
Please stay tuned for more updates about Proposition 8, the legal challenges and future efforts to protect traditional marriage in California.
Who is paying for this team, the state, or private donations?
Definitely not the state. The illustrious Attorney General, Jerry Brown, has requested the State Supreme Court to invalidate the vote of the people and throw out Prop 8. "Moonbeam" Brown may be setting himself up for another run as Governor.
May be? He was setting himself up for that when he served as Mayor of Oakland!
If it’s Kenneth Starr, he’s probably being paid for by Rosie O’Donnell, Ellen Degeneres, and several other celebrity homosexuals, to “support” Proposition 8, like he “prosecuted” Bill Clinton.
I’d sooner entrust a yellow dog to guard a bowl of bacon. He would eat the bacon, but at least he wouldn’t sanctimoniously lie about it afterwords.
Ken Starr needs to do something useful, like defending drug smugglers.
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.