Prop 8 overturned in California

[roomthreeseventeen]

Get thee to the courthouses, folks!

 

[auroralark]

Hooray!! So glad to hear this.

 

[mikelan6]

Great news indeed. It's a great step!

 

[jcb]

You can download the court's 138 page decision here:

http://www.ce9.uscourts.gov/prop8/FF_CL_Final.pdf

Be aware it may take a while.

 

[brios86]

This is great news!

 

[Sassagoula Billy]

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

It looks like there's a 2 day stay on the decision, but this is definitely a great step.

 

[PeterPan09]

It's a first step. This ruling will certainly be appealed by those who oppose government intervention unless the government is telling gay people they can't get married.

I won't be comfortable until the Supreme Court makes it the law of the land that gay people can marry.

 

[Joshua_me]

Hallelujah !

One step at a time my brethren.

 

[ImTooExcitedToSleep]

I won't be comfortable until the Supreme Court makes it the law of the land that gay people can marry.

I have no problem with the law itself....I have a problem with the COURTS making it the law. That's not their job, it's the job of the legislature.

 

[AJRitz]

I have no problem with the law itself....I have a problem with the COURTS making it the law. That's not their job, it's the job of the legislature.

Read the opinion (I did). The judge isn't "making law" here. He's applying about 50 years of well-established legal precedent to the facts of the case before him. In Loving v. Virginia the Supreme Court identified marriage as a fundamental Constitutional right. As a fundamental right, states must make that right equally available to all citizens, under the 14th amendment. The Loving court struck down laws prohibiting marriages between people of different races.

In this case, the judge applied the same principles and held that prohibiting same sex marriage impermissibly infringes on the right to marry on the basis of gender. The state was given the chance to argue to the court an important governmental interest that would be advanced by the prohibition. The judge ruled that the evidence of such an interest was insufficient to justify the intrusion on the Constitutional rights of same sex couples.

There was nothing groundbreaking about the legal reasoning. It was a quite conventional application of existing law to the facts before the court. Arguably, waiting for legislative recognition of same-sex marriage is LESS appropriate in this situation in a Constitutional Republic, because legally speaking, there shouldn't be anything there for the legislature to confer - marriage is a fundamental Constitutional right, and therefore already belonged to same sex couples. The court case was simply necessary to compel the state to recognize a right that already existed.

 

[FireDancer]

I have no problem with the law itself....I have a problem with the COURTS making it the law. That's not their job, it's the job of the legislature.

I agree with you but I don't see this as making law. I see it as an interpretation of the due process and equal protection clauses of the Constitution.

I completely agree with the ruling. I find it a bit sad that we are reliving the equal rights debate for the 3rd time in this country.

 

[simonkodousek]

YESSSSS!!!!! Too bad it took so much time to decide on something that shouldn't be an issue in the first place though... Ah well, I'm really, really happy to hear it was overturned!

 

[Disney Dad Canada]

Come up to Canada if you still have troubles down there. Marriage is allowed, gay and/or straight, country wide.

Everyone has the right to be just as miserable as anyone else.

 

[SusanWasHere]

Everyone has the right to be just as miserable as anyone else.

And this is why I'm single

 

[arilvdc]

you all just made my day...I live here in SoCal and when I saw the news I jumped up and shared it with my coworkers. Imagine my surprise when all but one of them were angry. I've worked with them for months and I would never have guessed they were against gay marriage and gays, period. They told me that it's a "choice" and that "the people voted" and that a "majority" were against it, so the courts are wrong...


....I felt like crying. These people are all my age (20's) and yet they want to take away someone's rights because they don't agree with their lifestyle? I mentioned the loving vs. virginia case and they told me that race isn't the same as sexuality because you can't choose your race.

I'm so glad that I can come here and see that there ARE people out there who are as gladdened by this news as I am.

 

[AJRitz]

you all just made my day...I live here in SoCal and when I saw the news I jumped up and shared it with my coworkers. Imagine my surprise when all but one of them were angry. I've worked with them for months and I would never have guessed they were against gay marriage and gays, period. They told me that it's a "choice" and that "the people voted" and that a "majority" were against it, so the courts are wrong...


....I felt like crying. These people are all my age (20's) and yet they want to take away someone's rights because they don't agree with their lifestyle? I mentioned the loving vs. virginia case and they told me that race isn't the same as sexuality because you can't choose your race.

I'm so glad that I can come here and see that there ARE people out there who are as gladdened by this news as I am.

Actually, that's what is so wonderful about the judge's decision. He was careful to make the decision a gender discrimination case, not a sexual orientation case. The reason the law is invalid is because classifying who can marry based on gender violates equal protection and due process guarantees in the 14th Amendment.

 

[stitchywoman]

I received a text message from my mother in law that says "woohoo NOH8" I love my mother in law! I am so happy that they have repealed this. I don't think anyone is going to make it easy or quick for the marriages to become fully legal unfortunately but it is atleast a step in the right direction. I honestly think I am gonna kiss that judge if I ever run into him. I get agitated when people say it is a decision. Honestly why would anyone choose a life that is going to get them alienated and make it so much harder to be themself? I don't think I chose to be attracted to men so why would I closed mindedly assume that my best friend "chose" to be attracted to women?
And I will now get off my soap box.

 

[DisnyMama]

My son and I were really very happy to hear that Prop 8 was overturned today !

 

[john1928]

Half the folks in California (or most any state) can't point to their state on an unmarked map of the world, expecting them to read and understand a 138 page ruling seems overly optimistic.

I suspect the frustration comes from being given the choice to vote (and told for their whole lives that their votes count) on the matter, then having it overturned and not understanding the constitutional basis for such a ruling. Blame it on weak Civics coverage in schools perhaps.

I completely agree with the ruling. I find it a bit sad that we are reliving the equal rights debate for the 3rd time in this country.

Bingo!

While never a cause that had much direct impact for me, I just don’t see the down side to letting folks live their lives. Look back at the efforts to obtain equal rights for minorities or women and would you really want to be part of the (large) crowd that was against such efforts ten or twenty years down the road? When in doubt grant more rights/freedoms/protections and we’ll probably look like better people to our grandkids…