Judge rules against proposition 8

Prop 8: still unconstitutional.

In the appeal case of Perry v. Shwarzenegger, the Ninth Circuit has held Judge Vaughn Walker’s previous decision and maintains that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional and in violation of California’s due process and equal protection rights! Details follow

Don’t get too excited.  The baddies have said they’ll appeal it all the way up to the Supreme Court which means there will likely be a stay on this ruling as well.  And I’m nervous about this case hitting the Supreme Court in its present configuration.

I long for a day when basic equality need not be fought for.  I work to achieve it by fighting against faith, which allows people to believe in gods who command inequality.

About JT Eberhard

When not defending the planet from inevitable apocalypse at the rotting hands of the undead, JT is a writer and public speaker about atheism, gay rights, and more. He spent two and a half years with the Secular Student Alliance as their first high school organizer. During that time he built the SSA’s high school program and oversaw the development of groups nationwide. JT is also the co-founder of the popular Skepticon conference and served as the events lead organizer during its first three years.

  • Randomfactor

    I could see SCOTUS ruling that the proponents don’t have standing (they like doing that) and thus kicking it back to state level.

  • otrame

    Yeah, I think Randomfactor is right. It’s going to be “full faith and credence” that will get to SCOTUS.

  • Ace of Sevens

    I’m thinking the Supreme doesn’t take this. It’s not about gay marriage per se and most of the legal issues involved only affect California.

  • Randomfactor

    Whatever happens, it will be calculated to extend the stay as long as cruelly possible, to no good effect. :(

  • Ryan Jung

    I think that this is honestly the absolute correct way to handle this problem. Our government is one where states are supposed to be allowed to make decisions independently of one another. So if you want something like gay marriage made possible in every state, you have to start at the state level. One of two things will happen:

    1) States will find a certain level of complacency with some having gay marriage codified and others non-codified, and there will be some migration of people to places where they feel they can reach optimum happiness.

    2) Someone will complain enough for this to go to the Supreme Court, which will probably hear the case and make a decision. If that decision is that gay marriage is an inalienable right that is constitutionally valid, then gay marriage will be allowed everywhere. If that decision is that gay marriage is *not* an inalienable right, then it remains a decision the states must handle independently, and you go back to #1.

    Either way, we’re on the right track, and the movement is becoming overwhelmingly weighted toward the LGBT side. I suspect most readers of your blog (myself included) are happy about that.

  • eigenperson

    Reinhardt and Hawkins wrote the majority opinion. Smith dissented.

    Pretty much the expected political split. The opinions are also exactly as one would expect.

  • Rieux

    Looong-winded comment urging that worrywarts like JT (joke!) stop moaning about what the Supreme Court could do and start celebrating the Ninth Circuit decision here.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X