Posts Tagged proposition 8
Activists Prepare for Immediate National Response to Prop 8 Ruling
Activists have begun organizing an immediate nationwide response called Day of Decision to the California Supreme Court’s ruling on Proposition 8, whenever it might come. The Court is required to rule within 90 days of the hearing but a decision could come at any time.
Robin Tyler, one of the original plaintiffs (with her wife Diane Olson) in the case that won same-sex marriage for Californians, is spearheading the action with co-organizer Andy Thayer and others have joined: “National groups including, Join the Impact, Centerlink, (the National Association of LGBT Community centers), Metropolitan Community Churches & others have signed on to help organize across the nation. ‘We’ve seen a tremendous outpouring from LGBT and allied individuals and organizations who wanted to join together in unity the night of the decision regardless of the outcome,’ said Tyler.”
Activists are planning for a unified effort, whether it be a protest or celebration. Those wanting information or are interested in organizing the movement in their city can go to the Day of Decision website.
March 18, 2009
Jerry Brown renews call for Prop 8 to be struck down
From yesterday’s Huffington Post, Daily Kos and the Office of the Attorney General
Proposition 8 Should Be Struck Down
Attorney General Jerry Brown
The California Supreme Court finds itself center stage this Thursday when it will hear oral arguments on whether it should uphold Proposition 8’s ban on same-sex marriage.
The case touches the heart of our democracy and poses a profound question: can a bare majority of voters strip away an inalienable right through the initiative process? If so, what possible meaning does the word inalienable have?
The state faced a dilemma like this before. In 1964, 65 percent of California voters approved Proposition 14, which would have legalized racial discrimination in the selling or renting of housing. Both the California and U.S. Supreme Courts struck down this proposition, concluding that it amounted to an unconstitutional denial of rights.
As California’s Attorney General, I believe the Court should strike down Proposition 8 for remarkably similar reasons — because it unconstitutionally discriminates against same-sex couples and deprives them of the fundamental right to marry.
Some vigorously disagree. That’s the position of Ken Starr and those who argue that a simple majority can eliminate the right to marry. But such a claim completely ignores California’s history and the nature of our constitution.
Fundamental rights in California are recognized and protected by our constitution, which declares in Article I, Section 1 that “all people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights” and “among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.”
These fundamental premises of a free people were declared when the constitution was first adopted. The initiative process came much later in 1911, when the immediate concern was to give the people power over the railroads, which were seen as having a stranglehold over the legislature. In creating this initiative process, there was no discussion or any evidence of intent to permit a simple majority of voters to take away the pre-existing rights deemed inalienable by Article I.
In 2008, the California Supreme Court was faced with the question of how the values enshrined in Article I apply to same sex marriages. It concluded that the concept of “liberty” includes the right to form the enduring relationship called marriage and that no compelling interest justified denying this right to same sex couples. Just like the right to be free from discrimination in housing, citizens have the right to be free from discrimination in state-granted marriage licenses.
With this Supreme Court decision, same sex marriage has the protection of Article 1 and, like other inalienable rights, cannot be taken away by a popular vote — whether it be 52% (as was the case in Proposition 8 ) or 65% (as it was for Proposition 14).
I believe, therefore, the Court must conclude as I have that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional and should be stricken.
1 comment March 5, 2009
Prop 8 and Families: Perspectives of the children of gay & lesbian parents
Palo Alto High School student, Amanda Young, has published a great article in her school magazine about the perspectives of several teen children of lesbian and gay parents on the inability of their parents to marry. Additionally, the article does not link to it, but here is an excellent study by the American Psychological Association of effects of anti-equal marriage amendments on the children of gay and lesbian headed families.
Redefining Family by Amanda Young of Verde Magazine
On March 5, 2009 at 9 a.m., while Paly junior Josh Lay will sit in his Physics 1 class listening to a lecture on sound waves, electricity, or magnetism, a discussion that could change his life will have commenced in the state Supreme Court’s chambers in San Francisco. Josh will sit restlessly in his seat, anxiously watching the clock tick and imagining the court hearing. Questions will race through his head: What are the witnesses saying? How long will it take for the jury to make their decision? Will his family be OK?
“I’ll be wondering the whole time what’s going on in the courtroom,” Josh says. “I’ll be thinking about it constantly, hoping my mothers’ marriage isn’t nullified.”
Across the school in his World History class, Josh’s brother Paly freshman Jeremy Lay will also be worrying about the state of his family.
“Maybe I’ll get to watch the hearing on TV, because Mr. Boloños shows us things like that,” Jeremy says. “I’ll be hoping for the best.”
On March 5, 2009, the state Supreme Court will be hearing arguments on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the measure that passed last November, banning marriages between same-sex couples. The court will also decide whether to nullify the same-sex marriages performed from June to November, numbering about 18,000, according to the William Institute at UCLA. “
h/t Bilerico Project
February 23, 2009
California Sup. Court to Hear Prop 8 Oral Arguments March 5th
California Supreme Court will hear oral arguments about the status of same-sex marriages performed prior to Prop 8’s passage and about the constitutionality of Prop 8 itself. Additionally, according to California law the Supreme Count must issue its decisions within 90 days of when oral arguments take place. Hopefully the spring will bring good news for Californian couples and the country. From the National Center for Lesbian Rights and Lambda Legal:
The California Supreme Court announced today that it will hear oral arguments on Thursday, March 5, 2009 in the Proposition 8 legal challenge. The National Center for Lesbian Rights, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU-with support from civil rights groups, religious organizations, labor unions, and legal scholars-argue that Proposition 8 is invalid because the people of California have established strict safeguards that prohibit the underlying principles of the California Constitution from being changed by a simple majority vote. By taking away a right only from one group, Proposition 8 violates the most basic principle of our government: that all people are entitled to equal treatment under the law.
California Attorney General Jerry Brown is also asking the Court to invalidate Proposition 8 on the ground that certain fundamental rights, including the right to marry, are inalienable and can not be put up for a popular vote. On November 10, 2008, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger stated that he hoped the Court would overturn Proposition 8. On CNN, he said of Proposition 8’s passage, “It’s unfortunate, obviously, but it’s not the end, I think that we will again maybe undo that, if the court is willing to do that, and then move forward from there and again lead in that area.”
To see details about the case, Strauss et al. v. Horton et al. (#S168047), and the list of Amicus Curiae Briefs check out the California Courts page on Prop 8.
February 4, 2009
