Facing Deadline, Prop. 8 Backers Seek New Review by Court. With Tuesday serving as the deadline for Prop. 8 proponents to request another appeal on the ruling that declared the voter initiative unconstitutional, proponents of California's same-sex marriage ban say they're seeking a full review by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Prop. 8 attorney Charles Cooper tellsMetroWeekly that he is seeking en banc review for the case — Prop. 8 was declared unconstitutional in 2010 by a federal judge, and a three judge appellate panel upheld that ruling two weeks ago. Now, the group ProtectMarriage, behind the 2008 antigay initiative, are seeking more of the Ninth Circuit to review the case. A majority of the approximately 20 Ninth Circuit judges have to approve an en banc review. Prop. 8: Supreme Court may redefine gay rights - Aurora. Nine years ago, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who may soon decide the fate of same-sex marriage in California, pondered the case of two Texas men who had been arrested in an apartment at gunpoint and charged with sodomy. Seventeen years earlier, and two years before President Ronald Reagan appointed Kennedy to the court, the justices had upheld a law against gay sex in Georgia.
One member of the majority, Chief Justice Warren Burger, wrote that the court would have to "cast aside millennia of moral teaching" to find that "homosexual sodomy is somehow protected as a fundamental right. " But by 2003, Kennedy said, most Americans, and a majority of the justices, had come to realize that gays and lesbians deserve "respect for their private lives" and freedom from government intrusion in their bedrooms. "Times can blind us to certain truths," he wrote in Lawrence vs. Texas, "and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress. " Same-sex marriage: It's inevitable - latimes.com - Aurora. The year 2012 is shaping up as a big one for same-sex marriage.
Last week, the Washington state Legislature passed a bill allowing gay marriage, and legislatures in Maryland and New Jersey may follow suit shortly (though New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has promised a veto). North Carolina and Minnesota are conducting referendums this year on constitutional amendments to bar gay marriage, and Maine is likely to conduct a referendum on legalizing it.
On Tuesday, the U.S. 9th Court of Appeals reminded us that courts too have something to say on the subject. L'interdiction du mariage gay en Californie "anticonstitutionnelle" Le Monde.fr avec AFP et Reuters | • Mis à jour le La cour d'appel fédérale de San Francisco a jugé mardi 7 février que l'interdiction pour les homosexuels de se marier en Californie était anticonstitutionnelle, confirmant une décision rendue par un juge fédéral en 2010, a-t-on appris auprès de la cour.
Les partisans de l'interdiction peuvent maintenant faire à leur tour appel, soit en s'adressant à un tribunal élargi de la 9e cour, soit en se tournant directement vers la Cour suprême. Le mariage homosexuel a été brièvement autorisé en Californie en 2008. La même année, les électeurs californiens se sont prononcés majoritairement en faveur d'une proposition interdisant les mariages entre personnes du même sexe. BREAKING: Ninth Circuit Strikes Down Proposition 8 on Narrow Grounds. [NOTE: This post was expanded and updated, with the last update at 2 p.m.]
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today affirmed the August 2010 decision by U.S. Olson and Boies Talk About Their Prop 8 Victory, With Slightly Differing Takes. One of the lawyers fighting Proposition 8 said that today's decision of the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Perry v. BREAKING: 9th Circuit Court Rules Prop 8 UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Tuesday, February 7th, 2012 Nearly one and a half years since Federal District Court Judge Vaughn Walker declared Proposition 8 to be unconstitutional in the landmark Perry v.
Brown case, the 9th US District Circuit Court of Appeals finally announced this morning that they will be upholding Judge Walker's decision: PROPOSITION H8 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL! Opponents of same-sex marriage will likely file an appeal to the decision, and the next steps may inevitably lead to a hearing before the US Supreme Court; casting the national spotlight on California's fight for the freedom to marry and putting the focus on same-sex marriage at a federal level. Most importantly, today's rulings open up the door for the same arguments to be used to the benefit of advancing pro-same-sex marriage legislation in other states. What does this mean in the now? Post Verdict Press Conference - Los Angeles February 7, 2012 7:37 PM, Post Verdict Press Conference - Los Angeles February 7, 2012 7:37 PM AmerEqualRights ... - Aurora.
The Ninth Circuit's Prop 8 Ruling: What To Expect Tomorrow? (UDPATED) 9th Circuit Upholds Ruling Striking Down Proposition 8. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a ruling by Judge Vaughn Walker declaring Proposition 8 unconstitutional.
Developing...refresh this page for updates... Writes Judge Stephen Reinhardt in a 2-1 decision: "We consider whether that amendment violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. We conclude that it does. " "Proposition 8 served no purpose,a nd has no effect, other than to lessen the status & human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples. " Proposition 8 Unconstitutional, 9th Circuit Rules: An Analysis. More than any single vote, more than any single veto, more than any single legislative majority, the Ninth Circuit's decision in Perry v.
Brown is the most significant advancement in the fight for marriage equality in American history to date. Consider this: Never before has a federal appellate court affirmed any of the conclusions that the Ninth Circuit did today: that denying committed gay couples their right to marry cannot encourage opposite sex marriages;that when a state denies the right to marry while allowing gay couples all the rights and privilges of marriage, it cannot base the marriage ban on any rationale that denigrates gay parents;that domestic partnerships are unequal to marriage;that, as a matter of law, marriage rights do not hinge on natural procreative ability; and, of course, that a ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.
Today's opinion was both broad and narrow, with wide implications and constrained effects. Analysis. Prop. 8: Gay-marriage ban unconstitutional, court rules - latimes.com - Aurora. A federal appeals court Tuesday struck down California's ban on same-sex marriage, clearing the way for the U.S.
Supreme Court to rule on gay marriage as early as next year. The 2-1 decision by a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot measure that limited marriage to one man and one woman, violated the U.S. Constitution. The architects of Prop. 8 have vowed to appeal. The ruling was narrow and likely to be limited to California.
Californie: Prop 8 à nouveau jugée contraire à la Constitution. La cour d’appel du 9e circuit de San Francisco a confirmé la décision du juge Vaughn Walker du 4 août 2010: la Proposition 8, qui a inclus dans la Constitution californienne la définition du mariage comme ne pouvant être conclu qu’entre un homme et une femme, est contraire à la Constitution des États-Unis.
Plus d’infos très vite sur Yagg. Prop 8: Le procès se poursuit, les people réagissent. 9TH CIRCUIT RULES PROP. 8 UNCONSTITUTIONAL. In a 2-1 vote, an appeals court panel rules that the 2008 ballot measure “serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples.”
By ANDREW HARMON (Breana Hansen, left, and Monica Chacon kiss outside of San Francisco City Hall after hearing that Proposition 8 has been ruled unconstitutional.) A federal appeals court has ruled California’s Proposition 8 unconstitutional, upholding retired U.S. district judge Vaughn Walker’s 2010 decision in the high-profile case and setting up what could be an eventual showdown over the ballot measure at the U.S. Supreme Court. Prop. 8: The Reaction Via Tweet Is Big - Aurora. Prop. 8: The Reaction Via Tweet Is Big When a California appeals court ruled that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional, Twitter unloaded a torrent of reaction from marriage equality supporters — and opponents. Here are just a few.
The court has rendered a powerful affirmation of the right of same-sex couples to marry. I applaud the wisdom and courage of this decision. — Jerry Brown (@JerryBrownGov) February 7, 2012. AFER's Griffin, Olson Discuss What's Next For Prop. 8. Plaintiffs and attorneys in the landmark federal case against Prop. 8 spoke at Los Angeles's oldest Catholic church after an appellate panel upheld a federal judge's decision overturning a ban on same-sex marriage in California. Chad Griffin, president of the board of directors at the American Foundation for Equal Rights, which brought the case to trial, downplayed the irony of the press conference location, saying with a smile that it was the only place AFER could book on short notice. He spoke more seriously about the case and the ramifications of ballot initiatives like Prop. 8. "Companionship and family are the basis of our happiness, of a life fulfilled, the American dream," Griffin said at the Tuesday press conference.
Video: Ted Olson on The Rachel Maddow Show. Ted Olson, former U.S. solicitor general and co-lead plaintiff’s attorney in the Prop. 8 case, called Tuesday’s ruling 'very broad,' despite the Ninth Circuit’s narrow application of its decision to California and not other states over which it has jurisdiction. Appearing on MSNBC’s The Rachel Maddow Show, Theodore Olson, former U.S. solicitor general and co-lead plaintiff’s attorney in the Prop. 8 case, called Tuesday’s ruling “very broad,” despite the Ninth Circuit’s narrow application of its decision to California and not other states over which it has jurisdiction. Speaking about marriage equality, Olson said, “The right exists in many other states now, and people are attempting to take that right away.” But the Ninth Circuit ruling articulated that “once you grant those rights ... you cannot take [them] away from those individuals without violating the constitution,” he said.
Watch the interview below via MSNBC. Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy. Op-ed: Disliking Us Is No Longer a Legal Rationale “Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples. The Constitution simply does not allow for ‘laws of this sort.’” — Majority Opinion, Perry v.
Brown, February 7, 2012.