Court Rules: Prop. 8 is Unconstitutional!

By a 2-1 decision of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Prop 8 violates the U.S. Constitution.

The haters vowed to appeal.

READ the ruling
Ninth Circuit Prop. 8 decision



source

Tomorrow: U.S. Court of Appeals To Rule on Prop 8

It's big time tomorrow in Cali-Cal. We will know about Prop 8 in the morning.

Here's the press release:

San Francisco, CA – The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will issue a ruling in the landmark federal civil rights case of Perry v. Brown on Tuesday February 7, 2012 by 10:00 a.m. PST.  The court will determine whether to uphold the historic August 2010 decision of the Federal District Court that found Proposition 8 unconstitutional.  Proposition 8 stripped gay and lesbian Californians of the fundamental freedom to marry. 

 

The American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER), the sole sponsor of the Perry case, will hold three media events on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 to discuss the significance and impact of the Ninth Circuit’s ruling:

 

1) A 10:30 a.m. PST press conference in Los Angeles at Vibiana, 214 S. Main St., Los Angeles, CA 90012.  Speaking at the press conference will be plaintiffs’ lead co-counsel Theodore B. Olson and David Boies; AFER Board President Chad Griffin; plaintiffs Kris Perry & Sandy Stier and Paul Katami & Jeff Zarrillo; and Dominick Zarrillo.

 

2) A national media conference call at 11:45 a.m. PST.  RSVP to melissa@afer.org for access code.  Speaking on the call will be plaintiffs’ lead co-counsel Theodore B. Olson and David Boies; AFER Board President Chad Griffin; plaintiffs Kris Perry & Sandy Stier and Paul Katami & Jeff Zarrillo; and Dominick Zarrillo.

 

3) A 5:00 p.m. PST press conference in San Francisco. Location is forthcoming.  Speaking at the press conference will be plaintiffs’ lead co-counsel Theodore B. Olson and David Boies; AFER Board President Chad Griffin; plaintiffs Kris Perry & Sandy Stier and Paul Katami & Jeff Zarrillo; Dominick Zarrillo; and San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera.

It's going to be epic tomorrow folks!

 

Prop 8 Supporters may lose their case against Judge Walker

Good news, of sorts... It looks like Judge Walker's ruling won't be overturned.

A federal appeals court on Thursday expressed reservations about putting a swift end to the legal challenge to California's Proposition 8 because the judge who struck down the state's gay marriage ban was in a long-term, same-sex relationship when he ruled last year.

During a hearing in San Francisco, a three-judge 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel peppered Proposition 8's lawyer with questions suggesting they were troubled by the charge that former Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker was biased because he failed to publicly disclose his relationship. While the judges did likewise pose several tough questions to gay rights lawyers, they appeared reluctant to agree with the argument Walker's ruling should be set aside based on his lengthy relationship with a male physician.

In particular, the judges were skeptical that Walker had an obligation to disclose whether he had a desire to marry his partner before the January 2010 trial.

So, hopefully this silly mess from the haters will be dropped and kicked aside. 

source

Supporters & Activists will hold “No Standing for Prop 8” sit-in Today

As the Prop 8 hearing jumps off in the California Supreme Court, supporters will hold a sit-in to protest the anti-gay measure:

“You can’t keep litigating a lawsuit just because you don’t like something – you actually have to be harmed in some way. The simple fact of the matter is that the freedom to marry brings enormous benefit to same-sex couples while harming no one else’s marriage. Accordingly, those who oppose equality have no standing to continue the suit,” said John Lewis, Marriage Equality USA’s Legal Director. 

“Same-sex couples and their families will once again stand up for their love and dignity by attending the hearing and staging a ‘No Standing for Prop 8’ sit-in beforehand. Lesbian and gay people have been more than patient in their struggle simply to be treated fairly and equally. The time for full equality is now,” said Billy Bradford of Marriage Equality USA. 

The hearing starts at 10am.

The Prop 8 Revolution Will Be Televised

The September 6th Prop 8 Hearing will be (FINALLY) televised.
The Advocate reports:

Oral arguments on a legal standing question in the Proposition 8 case will be televised live in September, according to a California Supreme Court spokeswoman.

Of the September 6 hearing, SF Appealreports that "because of public interest in the case, the court has approved a live statewide television broadcast of the arguments on the California Channel, a public affairs network," according to spokeswoman Lynn Holton.

I'm excited to watch this. It should a popcorn event.

Judge Ware Rejects Motion to Vacate Judge Walker’s Ruling

Judge Ware denied the haters' claim that Judge Walker was biased on the Prop 8 case.

He said:

"It is not reasonable to presume that a judge is incapable of making an impartial decision about the constitutionality of a law, solely because, as a citizen, the judge could be affected by the proceedings," U.S. District Judge James Ware wrote in his ruling Tuesday.

Here's the ruling
798

source

NCLR Executive Director Kate Kendell speaks on Yesterday's Prop 8 Case

The Ninth Circuit has Denied the Motion to resume gay marriages in California

In Cali-Cal, we will have to wait for Gay marriages. The motion to lift the stay was denied.

This morning, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a motion to vacate the stay pending appeal.

Federal Judge Vaughn Walker ruled last year that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional and ordered that same-sex weddings be allowed to resume. 

That decision was appealed to the Ninth Circuit, where the case is tied up on a legal question the panel asked the California Supreme Court to rule upon: Do Prop. 8 sponsors have legal standing to defend the law in court when the state will not.

The order was filed by judges Stephen R. Reinhardt, Michael Daly Hawkins and N. Randy Smith.

The order says: “Having considered all of the factors set forth in Nken v. Holder, 129 S. Ct. 1749, 1756 (2009), and all of the facts and circumstances surrounding Plaintiffs’ motion to vacate the stay pending appeal, as well as the standard for vacatur set forth in Southeast Alaska Conservation Council v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 472 F.3d 1097, 1101 (9th Cir. 2006), we deny Plaintiffs’ motion at this time.”

More to come.

source

Prop 8 Supporters Try to go around President Obama's DOMA Stance

The lawyers for the Haters are ignoring President Obama's stance on DOMA, saying that it has no bearing on a California case.

Here's what they are trying to do

As a result, the attorneys are urging a federal appeals court to keep blocking same-sex unions while it considers the constitutionality of the ballot measure known as Proposition 8.


The lawyers said in court papers filed Monday that the rationale for keeping the voter-approved ban in effect is the same now as it was last summer, when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals put a trial judge's order overturning Proposition 8 on hold.


Lawyers for two gay couples are asking the 9th Circuit to let same-sex marriages resume in California.

Good grief.

source

California Supreme Court will take the Prop 8 Case

The California Supreme Court will listen to the supporters of Prop 8 and decide if they have a legal right to defend the ban. Here's more:

In their weekly closed-door conference, the Supreme Court granted a request from a federal appeals court to review the issue, which has clouded the legal battle over Proposition 8. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in an order last month, asked California's high court to tackle whether proponents of the ballot measure have a legal right to appeal a federal judge's order last summer declaring the state's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.

The issue has arisen because both former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and then-Attorney General Jerry Brown refused to defend the law, agreeing with Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker's conclusion that Proposition 8 tramples on the rights of gay and lesbian couples. Brown, now governor, and new Attorney General Kamala Harris likewise refuse to appeal Walker's decision, leaving backers of the measure on their own to defend the law.
The state Supreme Court must now determine if California's ballot initiative process provides so-called "standing" for backers of such measures to press forward in the courts when the governor and attorney general will not defend a state law.

The outcome may be critical to how the legal battle over Proposition 8 unfolds. Court finds that Proposition 8 supporters do not have such a right, the 9th Circuit has indicated that it is likely unable to decide the central question in the case __ whether the same-sex marriage ban violates federal equal protection rights. As a result, Walker's ruling would stand, enabling gay marriages to resume in California, but the case would be confined to only resolving the issue in California.

However, if the Supreme Court rules that Proposition 8 backers can defend the law on their own, the case would return to the 9th Circuit, where the judges have also signalled they would then be in a position to resolve the legality of Proposition 8. That decision would then tee up the gay marriage issue for the U.S. Supreme Court, giving the case national implications.

Either way, it is likely to be months or longer before the state Supreme Court rules on the standing issue, delaying the outcome in the long legal battle over gay marriage in California. 

source

WATCH The Trash Heap Maggie Gallagher say the Reversal of Prop 8 would End Marriage

WATCH the Oral Arguments for the Federal Appeals Court Prop 8 Hearing LIVE

This starts at 1pm EST and 10am in Cali-Cal

Yes, I hijacked this from NOM

TODAY: Prop 8 Oral Arguments

Well, it's happening, the Prop 8 oral arguments kicks off today.

I will keep y'all up to date on the hearings.

UPDATED! Prop 8 Backers are trying to Oust Circuit Judge Stephen R. Reinhardt

In a desperate, desperate attempt to win, haters are trying to get Circuit Judge Stephen R. Reinhardt removed from the case. Why?  Because they think he too liberal to be fair.

Backers of California’s Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage formallly asked one of the three Ninth Circuit judges scheduled to hear the constitutional challenge to the ban to take himself off the case, arguing that his wife has been actively involved as a foe of the measure.  

In a motion for disqualification, the supporters of the ban called for recusal of Circuit Judge Stephen R. Reinhardt.


Judge Reinhardt’s spouse is Ramona Ripston, executive director of the American Civil Liberies Union’s Southern California affiliate.  “Under Ms. Ripston’s leadership,” the motion said, her organization has taken a lead role “in what it calls ‘the fight to end marriage discrimination’ in California.”  The chapter also has “taken an acive role in this litigation,” it added.

Relying on the federal recusal law, the Proposition 8 backers said that a judge must “disqualilfy himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”  It argued:” The facts of this case would plainly lead a reasonable person to conclude that Judge Reinhardt’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”   Even if the ACLU/SC is not a direct party in the case, it added, the lawyers for the challengers to Proposition 8 consulted with her before filing the lawsuit. amd the affiliate has been involved in other ways.

It noted that Judge Reinhardt had previously taken himself out of cases in which ACLU/SC was involved.  It is up to the judge individually to decide whether to disqualify himself from the Proposition 8 case.

Here's their silly motion
Prop. 8 Recusal Motion 9th CA
source

UPDATE

Judge Stephen R. Reinhardt said HELL NAW!

“Filed order (STEPHEN R. REINHARDT) I have before me defendants-intervenors-appellants’ motion to disqualify myself from this appeal. I have not hesitated to recuse from cases in the past when doing so was warranted by the circumstances. See Khatib v. County of Orange, 622 F.3d 1074, 1074 (9th Cir. 2010); Mohamed v. Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc., 586 F.3d 1108, 1109 (9th Cir. 2009); Buono v. Kempthorne, 527 F.3d 758, 760 (9th Cir. 2008); Sw. Voter Registration Educ. Project v. Shelley, 344 F.3d 913, 914 (9th Cir. 2003); Valeria v. Davis, 320 F.3d 1014, 1015 n.** (9th Cir. 2003); Alvarez-Machain v. United States, 284 F.3d 1039, 1039 n.1 (9th Cir. 2002); Coalition for Econ. Equity v. Wilson, 122 F.3d 692, 711 (9th Cir. 1997). Here, for reasons that I shall provide in a memorandum to be filed in due course, I am certain that “a reasonable person with knowledge of all the facts would [not] conclude that [my] impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” United States v. Nelson, 718 F.2d 315, 321 (9th Cir. 1983); see also Sao Paulo State of the Federated Republic of Brazil v. Am. Tobacco Co., 535 U.S. 229, 233 (2002) (per curiam). I will be able to rule impartially on this appeal, and I will do so. The motion is therefore DENIED. [7564262]”

So run and tell that!

source

Ninth Circuit has Announced the Panel for the Prop 8 Appeal

Next week kicks off the hearing of Judge Vaughn Walker’s Prop 8 ruling.

The panel, which includes Stephen Reinhardt (appointed by Carter) and  Michael D. Hawkins (appointed by Clinton), will hear the case on Monday the 6th.

See here:
Ninth Circuit Panel for Prop 8 Appeal


source

Kamala Harris IS California's Attorney General

After a brutal election battle, Kamala Harris is the Attorney General of Cali-Cal.

Why is this important? Well, this Diva will NOT defend the overturn of Prop 8 (which is coming up soon) and she's a supporter of the fam.

For more on the story, go here

Save the Date: December 6 for the Prop. 8 Appeal

This coming around the corner, y'all. The court of appeals for the ninth circuit will hear the oral arguments for Prop 8 on December 6 at 10 in the morning in San Fran.

There's a part of me that wants to be there around that time. But who knows when it will settled.

Anywho, save the date.