Tag: Prop 8

Posted on

Prop 8 backers to ask 9th Circuit for larger panel ruling

The proponents of Proposition 8 intend to appeal for an en banc ruling from the full Ninth Circuit Court. Earlier this month a three-judge panel of Ninth Circuit members voted to uphold the overturn of Prop 8.  Now the haters want MORE 9th Circuit judges to hear an appeal.

Chris Geidner explains at Metro Weekly:

Usually, en banc review involves all of the active judges on the court, but the Ninth Circuit — due to the more than 20 active judges on the circuit — has adopted a unique “limited en banc” procedure in which all the active Ninth Circuit judges vote whether en banc consideration will be given. That will be the request made by today’s filing.

If a majority of the court supports en banc consideration, then the chief judge of the circuit, Judge Alex Kozinski, and 10 randomly selected appellate judges from the circuit will hear the en banc appeal, which can involve briefing and oral arguments.

After that decision is reached, theoretically, a party dissatisfied with an en banc ruling of the Ninth Circuit can ask for the full Ninth Circuit to review the en banc panel’s decision, but the court has not agreed to do so since adopting the “limited en banc” procedure.

The never ending saga continues…

Posted on

US Supreme Court may not hear Prop 8 appeal

“Given the reasoning of the Ninth Circuit’s decision and its focus on the specific circumstances that led to the enactment of Prop 8 in California, it may be a tall order for the supporters of Prop 8 to persuade the Supreme Court to take the case.”

“The Supreme Court normally only accepts cases when different federal appellate courts have reached opposite conclusions on the same legal issues, or where a decision has broad national implications. The Ninth Circuit’s California-focused decision presents neither of those circumstances. Unless the Supreme Court breaks with its own tradition and intervenes in the case, it’s possible that wedding bells will be ringing in California again before the end of the year.” – Shannon Minter, legal counsel for the National Center for Lesbian Rights.
(via JMG)

Posted on

George Clooney speak out on behalf of gay marriage

George Clooney tells E!’s Marc Malkin that he’ll be playing AFER attorney David Boies in the L.A. production of Dustin Lance Black’s ‘8’.

Clooney’s participation was announced in December, but until now it was unclear what role he would be playing.

Said Clooney to Malkin: “I think the world is changing and it’s becoming less and less of an issue and I think it shouldn’t be long now,” Clooney said. “I think younger people are looking at this like, ‘Who cares?’ I do believe it’s generational, much like the civil rights movement. Young people started taking to the streets and things changed. This really is the final leg of the civil rights movement.”

Clooney told The Hollywood Reporter in December: “It is astonishing that gay and lesbian Americans are still treated as second-class citizens. I am confident that, very soon, the laws of this nation will reflect the basic truth that gay and lesbian people — like all human beings — are born equal in dignity and rights.”

‘8’ will run one night only at Los Angeles’ Wilshire Ebell Theatre on March 3.

Posted on

CA group has until May 14th to gather Prop 8 repeal signatures

A Los Angeles-based group called Love Honor Cherish has been cleared to collect the 807,615 voter signatures required to qualify its initiative for the November 2012 ballot, the secretary of state’s office said. The deadline for the petitions and signatures is May 14th.

The repeal initiative submitted by Love Honor Cherish would strike Proposition 8 and state instead “that marriage is between only two persons and shall not be restricted on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, gender, sexual orientation, or religion,” according to a summary prepared by the California Attorney General’s office. It also contains language stating that clergy would not be required to perform marriages that violate their religious beliefs, if the initiative passes.

Prop 8 was passed in 2008 with 52% approval five months after the California Supreme Court legalized marriage equality.

LGBT activists are awaiting a ruling from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on whether last year’s lower court decision that struck down Prop 8 will be upheld.

Posted on

CA Supreme Court says Prop 8 proponents have standing

The California Supreme Court issued its opinion that the backers of Proposition 8 should have standing to defend the measure.

The question had been punted to the California court by the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, who will now take the opinion into consideration while making their own decision on the issue.

The Ninth Circuit will now take the appeal, Perry v. Brown, back under advisement and decide how it wishes to proceed on the federal standing question.

If the California Supreme Court finds the proponents to have a “particularized interest” or “the authority to assert the State’s interest,” the Ninth Circuit could then find the proponents to have standing.

At that point, the appeal of the Perry trial court decision — the “merits” decision from the trial court that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional — could go forward.

Posted on

Prop 8: Federal judge orders trial tapes released

A federal judge has ordered the unsealing of a video of the court trial that resulted in California’s ban on gay marriage being ruled unconstitutional.

“No compelling reasons exist for continued sealing of the digital recording of the trial, U.S. District Court Judge James Ware said in a decision issued Monday. He stayed his decision, which is posted here, until September 30 to allow for any appeal.

Same-sex marriage opponents had sought to keep the trial recording under wraps, citing what they contended were assurances from the judge who handled the trial and later retired, Vaughn Walker. Those opposing public release of the video also argued that release was effectively barred by a Supreme Court order overturning plans for a live, closed-circuit broadcast of the trial to various courthouses across the country.

However, Judge Ware said that the Supreme Court ruling didn’t amount to a requirement to seal the video and that the recording had been used both by the judge and at trial.
(more at Politico)

Posted on

CA Supreme Court hears arguments on Prop 8 issue: “Do Proponents have standing?”

Via the Advocate: The California Supreme Court heard arguments today that could have far reaching implications not only for same-sex marriage in California, but also for future ballot initiatives like Proposition 8, which banned gay people in 2008 from wedding.

The question at today’s hearing is about whether a group unaffiliated with the state government has the right to defend a state law in court — in this case, Proposition 8. 

Former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, current governor Jerry Brown, and Attorney General Kamala Harris have all refused to defend the ballot initiative from challenges to its constitutionality. So the proponents of Proposition 8, which spent heavily and organized to pass the law, have been fighting to fill the void left by the state.

Lawyer Charles Cooper, representing the antigay ProtectMarriage.com, argued that other courts have allowed proponents of ballot initiatives to defend their laws because they have a specific interest.

Cooper was pressed by a justice who asked him whether those against marriage equality would be able to show any actual injury if same-sex couples were allowed to legally wed. 



Ted Olson, representing the gay and lesbian couples suing the state for marriage equality, received push-back from one justice who challenged his assertion that the state attorney general has authority to pick and choose which laws are worth keeping. After some prodding, Olson clarified that an attorney general must enforce the laws but does not have to defend them.

After the trial, Olson told reporters that the justices were tough, but he said he felt encouraged by the line of questioning, according to the Courage Campaign.

“There is ample authority that individuals do not have a right to defend a law unless they would suffer a direct and immediate harm from its invalidation,” Olson said in a statement through Americans For Equal Rights. “The proponents of Proposition 8 will not suffer any harm from a decision that grants gay and lesbian Californians their fundamental civil right to marry. It is the Attorney General who has the exclusive authority to make litigation decisions on behalf of the State, and here the Attorney General has made the sound decision that the discriminatory provisions of Proposition 8 do not warrant defense on appeal. Proponents cannot second-guess that exercise of discretion.”