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

[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...