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

To: Simmy2.5
The argument is, whether this is a constitutional amendment (that can be voted on solely by the people) or a revision (that requires a vote by 2/3rd of the California legislature).

I would think that the People of California trump the Supreme Court of California so long as what they passed doesn't violate the US Constitution.

13 posted on 11/19/2008 3:20:25 PM PST by rustbucket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: rustbucket

Since when did the men in black robes care about the people?

Of course, there is an issue here. If this was a constitutional revision, shouldn’t this have been judged on BEFORE the election took place?

In fact, they did decide on it before the election when the ACLU wanted the proposition off the ballot anyways (using the same argument that it is a revision and not an amendment), the court rejected that argument and allowed it on the ballot anyways (but still allowed gay marriages to continue, and, left open a possible court challenge later if it passed).

Apparently they were hoping it would fail. Which it didn’t.


17 posted on 11/19/2008 3:36:17 PM PST by Simmy2.5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

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