Posted by
Playful Walrus on Wednesday, February 16, 2011 7:02:04 PM
The California Supreme Court (give or take a different member or two) struck down in 2008 the voter-backed law voted in as Prop 22, which reinforced the longstanding law that marriage unites a bride and a groom. Thus, they neutered state marriage licensing as they refused to delay the implementation of their decision until the November 2008 election. A ballot measure was already pending to add the marriage-defense language to the state constitution. In November 2008, that amendment was adopted by the people of California, who voted for Proposition 8, which went into effect immediately. The amendment was challenged, and the state Supreme Court affirmed that it was a valid amendment to the state constitution. Then, the marriage neutering advocated took the matter to a a federal court, where a homosexual judge held somewhat of a strange trial and issued a ridiculous opinion overturning the state constitutional amendment. Subsequently, it was shifted up to the federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (while marriage neutering has remained on hold pending outcomes). That court asked the California court to decide whether or not the people defending the constitutional amendment even have standing to do so, since they are the sponsors of the amendment, not the state elected officials (who abandoned their duties)..
Got that?
Today, the California court said it will consider the question of whether or not the very people it previously allosed to defend the amendment should be allowed to defend the amendment before the 9th Circuit Court of appeals. If the state court does the consistent thing and says yes, the 9th Circuit will take up the case and will likely neuter marriage licensing for all states, not just California. And then the issue will likely go to the Supreme Court of the United States.
My analysis of today's announcement and the biased LATimes.com coverage is
over at The Opine Editorials.