Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Prop 8 Withstands Federal Challenge (California Gay Marriage Debate)
Ken Malloy's Blog on CBS47News ^ | 7-17-09 | Ken Malloy

Posted on 07/17/2009 8:10:18 PM PDT by cakid1

Today, a federal judge tossed out yet another challenge to Proposition 8.

(Prop 8 is a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman in California)

This time the challenge was on "federal constitutional grounds..."

(Excerpt) Read more at community.cbs47.tv ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: gaymarriage; gaystapo; homosexualagenda; homosexualmarriage; lawsuit; prop8; proposition8; protectmarriage; ruling; traditionalmarriage
What's next?
1 posted on 07/17/2009 8:10:18 PM PDT by cakid1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cakid1

Eight years of Obama and we may just have a supreme court that may see this differently.


2 posted on 07/17/2009 8:13:17 PM PDT by umgud (Look to gov't to solve your everday problems and they'll control your everday life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cakid1
What's next?

As near as I can tell, continuous and neverending challenges both in the courts and at the ballot box until the gays win, just once, then a closing off of discussion.
3 posted on 07/17/2009 8:14:00 PM PDT by Phileleutherus Franciscus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cakid1

“United States District Court Judge David Carter threw out the challenge to Proposition 8 and dismissed the state of California as a defendant in the case of Smelt vs. United States.”

(But...portions of the case challenging the federal Defense of Marriage Act will be heard next month.)

“This is another great day for marriage in California,” said Andrew Pugno, Chief Legal Counsel for ProtectMarriage.com, the official campaign committee for Proposition 8.

“The twice-expressed will of the people of California for traditional marriage is under assault from many lawsuits, but our recent string of victories in both state and federal courts is very gratifying.”


4 posted on 07/17/2009 8:14:59 PM PDT by califamily4W (FREEDOM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cakid1
Sanity 1

Abnormal, unnatural and immoral behavior. 0

5 posted on 07/17/2009 8:22:15 PM PDT by South40 (Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. ~Hussein Obama, Cairo, Egypt, June 4, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: califamily4W
Follow the link in Malloy's blog. Read the article.

The case was tossed because the litigants had no standing (they suffered no harm). It won't take long for Olson to find two individuals with standing.

6 posted on 07/17/2009 8:22:49 PM PDT by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Phileleutherus Franciscus
As near as I can tell, continuous and neverending challenges both in the courts and at the ballot box until the gays win, just once, then a closing off of discussion.

Sarah Palin knows the continuous and never ending challenges all too well, thus the guttural hatred for her by the left.

Our country is losing it's sense of direction rapidly IMO.

7 posted on 07/17/2009 8:27:26 PM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cakid1

Grinds my guts. This shouldn’t be any of the damned Feds business in the first place.


8 posted on 07/17/2009 8:30:46 PM PDT by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists...Call 'em What you Will, They ALL have Fairies Living In Their Trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cakid1

The voting rights of blacks and hispanics have upheld.

I love how the media and Hollywood likes to blame the Mormons for Prop 8. Minorites made Prop 8 possible. Why aren’t liberals going after minorities?


9 posted on 07/17/2009 8:31:34 PM PDT by DanZanRyu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag
From your said link...The challenge to the Federal DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) law will move forward with the U.S, Department of Justice as the official defendant.(???) The next hearing is scheduled for August 3.
10 posted on 07/17/2009 8:34:33 PM PDT by califamily4W (FREEDOM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag
The case was tossed because the litigants had no standing (they suffered no harm).

Exactly... they already can get the same protections and rights that married folks have... the only thing they want is a piece of paper... so they can undermine religion.

This is why we need to bring the "loser pays" system in our courtrooms... to weed out the lunatics.

11 posted on 07/17/2009 8:36:03 PM PDT by John123 (Turn on your teleprompter Obama and read your lips... "No New Taxes!!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cakid1

Isn’t this the same judge handling the Keyes v. B.O. birth certificate case?


12 posted on 07/17/2009 8:37:16 PM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cakid1
What's next?

Obama either names a 1) Gay Czar, or 2) a Marriage Czar, to settle the matter without any other federal oversight.

-PJ

13 posted on 07/17/2009 8:40:41 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (This just in... Voting Republican is a Terrorist act!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rockinqsranch
"This shouldn’t be any of the damned Feds business in the first place."

Yup. And it isn't, if the Constitution were worth more than Charmin today.
14 posted on 07/17/2009 8:43:24 PM PDT by RightOnTheLeftCoast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: umgud
Eight years of Obama and we may just have a supreme court that may see this differently.

Eight years of 0bama, and we won't have or need a supreme court.

15 posted on 07/17/2009 8:47:44 PM PDT by glock rocks (... just tryin to make do ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Phileleutherus Franciscus

i would agree.

personally, i think the states that are approving/re-affirming the state sovereignty rights will be the way to stop the overzealous actions of the fedgov. as this is SUPPOSED to be a representative republic, how is it that fed law is trumping anything the states do.

homo-rights to taxes. the states need to be able to set up demarcation lines so the residents of each state can live by the laws they wish. if the state decides that it’s residents do not wish homo-marriage, then that’s it. if the people of the state don’t want to pay more then 15% of their income to the fedgov, then that’s it. and when paying taxes, instead of an end-run around the state, the individuals should pay to their district, and the district to the state, and the state to the fed.

any state that sets these policies and pushes them, would have a massive influx of businesses and people. and in states like florida, that would mean increased revenues from additional sales as well as a jump in real estate values

this would also mean a reduction in the power of the fed on the lives of everyday citizens

and if a citizen doesn’t like what his/her state is doing... they could move to another state (unlike now, where you cannot avoid paying for 0bama’s socialist Amerika even if you left the country)


16 posted on 07/17/2009 9:08:39 PM PDT by sten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DanZanRyu

Why doesn’t the left go after Muslims on their view on homosexuality?


17 posted on 07/17/2009 9:28:23 PM PDT by Islaminaction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cakid1
I don't think it will withstand a trip to the USSC without a Constitutional Amendment.

Personally, I can't make an argument that would over-ride the 4th Amendment assurance of equal protection.

I hope somebody else can.

18 posted on 07/17/2009 9:49:21 PM PDT by Mariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
Personally, I can't make an argument that would over-ride the 4th Amendment assurance of equal protection.

What equal protection?
That went out the window when taxes were accepted as a means to punish some groups arbitrarily and capriciously.

My suggestion that we tax left-handed blondes at the highest tax rate, as long as it is done democratically (by vote) doesn't sound so silly any more.

19 posted on 07/18/2009 12:48:57 AM PDT by Publius6961 (Change is not a plan; Hope is not a strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cakid1

The story title is misleading - Prop 8 didn’t “withstand” anything. The plaintiffs just didn’t have standing. There are more bullets in the lefts magazine.


20 posted on 07/18/2009 5:02:45 AM PDT by fwdude (Be still, my soul: the waves and winds still know His voice who ruled them while He dwelt below.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
While true the progressive income tax...along with allowances and credits...is a clear violation of the 4th, it's unlikely one would get a sympathetic hearing on it. The judiciary protects the other two branches on this matter..."deferring"...like no other issue except, perhaps, national security. And, recently, national security has come under judicial scrutiny.

I've always wanted to be part of a suit to overturn the current tax system on 4th amendment grounds...but, oh boy, the establishment would REALLY come after you on that one.

Butt-buddy marriage would get a far more sympathetic hearing.

That can only lead one to the conclusion that Michael Savage is right on this count: Liberalism is a Mental Disorder.

21 posted on 07/18/2009 7:43:35 AM PDT by Mariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson