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. Because the Ninth Circuit is a large circuit, they could approve a partial en banc, which would allow 11 judges to rule on the constitutionality of Prop. 8. The en banc request will likely keep the case out of the Supreme Court until the 2012 presidential election. 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.
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. L'interdiction du mariage gay en Californie "anticonstitutionnelle" 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. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker that California's 2008 amendment banning same-sex couples from marriage is unconstitutional, deciding the case on narrow grounds relating to the facts of the amendment's impact, which the court notes was to "eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California. " Same-sex couples cannot begin marrying in California today, however, as the court also kept in place its stay halting enforcement of the unconstitutionality decision for the time being.
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. Brown striking down the initiative makes it "somewhat less likely" that the U.S. Supreme Court would hear an appeal of the case, while his co-counsel was more ambitious, suggesting that the ruling could have a ripple effect of advancing marriage equality in Georgia and Arkansas. On a conference call organized by the American Foundation for Equal Rights, which brought the case, attorney David Boies told reporters, "I think the grounds do make it somewhat less likely that the Supreme Court will take it. " 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.
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) The Ninth Circuit will issue a much-anticipated opinion in the Prop 8 case, Perry v.
Brown, tomorrow. Avid readers of Towleroad will remember that we have followed this case closely every step of the way (including here, here, here, here, here, and here). 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. 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. Californie: Prop 8 à nouveau jugée contraire à la Constitution. 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.)
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. 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. 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. 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.