Skip to comments.Calif. won't appeal Prop 8 ruling (and judge says regular citizen have no standing)
Posted on 08/13/2010 4:15:28 AM PDT by xzins
SAN FRANCISCO, Aug. 12 (UPI) -- California will not appeal a U.S. judge's decision to lift a stay on his injunction blocking the state's voter-enacted ban on same-sex marriage, officials said.
U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn R. Walker said Thursday he would lift the stay and allow same-sex marriages to proceed, but not until Aug. 18. Such marriages would be permitted after that unless an appeals court, possibility the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, issues a stay beyond the date.
Walker warned the amendment's sponsors may not have standing, or status, to make the appeal because they were not affected by the stay.
"As it appears at least doubtful that proponents will be able to proceed with their appeal without a state defendant, it remains unclear whether the court of appeals will be able to reach the merits of proponents' appeal," Walker wrote. "In light of those concerns, proponents may have little choice but to attempt to convince either the governor or the attorney general to file an appeal to ensure jurisdiction."
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and state Attorney General Jerry Brown had urged the judge to immediately lift the stay, allowing gay and lesbian marriages to go on during the legal process, and a spokesman for the governor indicated Thursday Schwarzenegger will not appeal the ruling, the Los Angeles Times reported.
"The governor supports the judge's ruling," spokesman Aaron McLear said.
If higher courts concur with Walker on the standing issue, they would not decide the issue on its merits, the newspaper said. However, the case could still get further hearings on procedural issues, during which time the ruling overturning Proposition 8 would stand in California.
In issuing a preliminary injunction Aug. 4 against the ban, a state constitutional amendment called Proposition 8, the judge said it "both unconstitutionally burdens the exercise of the fundamental right to marry and creates an irrational classification on the basis of sexual orientation."
The Times said the sponsors had warned they would go to the U.S. Supreme Court seeking a stay if Walker allowed same-sex marriages to continue.
California voters approved the ban in November 2008 by a 52.3 percent majority six months after the California Supreme Court ruled laws against same-sex marriage violated the state Constitution. The state court later upheld Prop 8 as a valid amendment to the state Constitution.
Pick your march:
Aug. 28 with Glenn Beck
Sept. 12 the 9/12 Project
Ultimately, I fear that the govt will try to force churches and clergy to perform same sex marriage ceremonies or lose their tax exempt status.
Polygamy would be easier to rule as being valid marriage, as it is legal many countries, and historically had been recognized even in the Bible (at least for kings).
That’s exactly right. Gray Davis did it to 187. Hence, the constitutionality of 187 has never been fully litigated.
This is an interesting legal point. The judge is asserting that homosexual marriage has no effect on heterosexuals or society as a whole, or at least not a negative effect.
I agree with you, hadn’t seen the ‘no standing’ tactic until Obama’s lawyers used it in blocking release of his BC.
This much is known, that the Left and its lawyers talk, message and conference amongst themselves. Hence it’s not a stretch to imagine they are using the same tactics for different issues.
agreed and we still have so called conservatives saying well I know a homosexual and they are nice so I have no problem if they get married etc.
Also look at the talk radio , so called conservative TV show hosts.
Do we ever hear the likes of Hannity etc talk about the homosexual agenda?
No they’re too afraid to and being afraid is what the homosexuals want in order to pass their agenda.
We know this is not about marriage this is about a step in their agenda, next step is to teach it in schools, force private schools religious orgs etc.
We also have to stop playing their word game, they are not gay, gay has another meaning and the word should not be hijacked, they are homosexuals so we should all be saying homosexuals
In general, I think the whole “standing” thing has become “shut up, you peasants have no say in what we elites are doing.”
“In general, I think the whole standing thing has become shut up, you peasants have no say in what we elites are doing.”
Bingo. We have a winner!
When prop 8 passed, I told my wife it’s great, but they’ll have it overturned in a year. Turned out it took them 2.
I think we reach the end of the rope about November.
Dropping LA & SF would suffice. The rest of the state isn’t too bad...
Maybe - but she will work harder to get the business of the state in better shape. JB has no decernable change in i his ideas - which are part of the 40 year DemocRAT system of running government. She will change somethings - what I don’t know but she will be able to look at a P&l and see what is BS. That is a start.
Voters who passed the proposition have no standing because they aren’t affected?
... And WTF
It was touch and go for a few generations there after the American Revolution, but Their Lordships have now got the peasants back in their places.
It was. By Jerry Brown, Ca. AG. Consider the the contempt shown to the people by a state AG actively moving to thwart the people and will not defend their legal interests. Jerry Brown is a communist bastard. One wonders if Meg Whitman "is a huge fan".
The state court later upheld Prop 8 as a valid amendment to the state Constitution. When push comes to shove, we see that we actually have a Ruling Class dictatorship, by and for the benefit of elitist, memebers-only Oberfuhrers.
‘Schwarzenegger should be dragged out of office and not allowed to complete his term.’
He and Gov moonbeam should be hung by their necks until dead for failing to uphold the Constitution of the state of California.
How did we ever permit a single court and a single judge to outweigh the vote of the People?
209 is the law, but you are correct about Prop 187. It was never appealed.
This took me a while...did you mean Weimar Republic?
She is too politically soft and squishy to do anything. She lied to get the nomination and she cannot be trusted. I will not vote for her.
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.