Devil's advocate

[sigma7]

FYI re: the California Supreme Court's decision today that essentially upholds Prop 8 -- please keep in mind (and I've seen most people getting this correctly but it still bears repeating) that the Supremes didn't weigh in on the merits of Prop 8 in and of itself. This ruling is entirely about the level of involvement of the state legislature in state constitutional amendments -- the petitioners' argument was that Prop 8 was invalid because it didn't clear the legislature, and that it needed to, being so restrictive on the constitution's equal protection clause. It was a tenuous argument at best, and I have to say I'd have weighed in with the six instead of the one, if only for the ramifications for later constitutional-amendment initiatives. (Of course, keep in mind all of my legal knowledge I got from riding in squad cars and watching episodes of Quincy M.E. -- legal eagles, shoot me down if/where I err.)

The court isn't where this battle needs to be fought and won -- it's in the electorate. Good luck.

Comments

[spankingfemme.livejournal.com]

"(Of course, keep in mind all of my legal knowledge I got from riding in squad cars and watching episodes of Quincy M.E.)"

LOL! You are too cute ;)

[anw.livejournal.com]

Not entirely sure of that last remark's veracity. It's the courts, not the electorate, that traditionally leads in the protection of minorities. Of the six states that have legalised gay marriage (including California), only two did so via the legislature. The other four don't count less.

[sigma7.livejournal.com]

I think I have (too much?) faith in the Californian electorate -- but you're right, in historical terms certainly, it's typically the "activist judges" that spur the most profound social change, and even when they don't, their presence is inevitably called upon in legal challenges where the electorate initiated the change. The legislative changes have been in states with profoundly different demographics than California, and given its profound size, diversity, and cultural status, it's going to be a much more compelling battleground for the special interests of every side of the issue to converge (again), more so than the New England states.

[ravenskye8.livejournal.com]

I agree that I think this may have more traction in the courts after today's ruling than before...

You now have a legal paradox... and therefore better fuel for future legal action...