Gay marriage ban overturned in California

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
It's About Time

California gay marriage ban overturned, appeal planned

(Reuters) - An appeals court on Tuesday found California's gay marriage ban unconstitutional in a case that may lead to a showdown in the Supreme Court.

Supporters of the ban said they would appeal the judgment, calling it "out of step with every other federal appellate and Supreme Court decision." Their appeal is likely to keep gay marriage in the state on hold pending future proceedings.

But the lawyers who won the appeals court round called the decision a milestone, and outside City Hall in San Francisco, a center for gay rights, dozens of same-sex couples hugged and kissed in public, cheering the ruling.

"It means we are included in the American Dream," said Joe Capley-Alfano, who married his husband, Frank, in the summer of 2008, a window of legal same-sex marriage in California.

The majority in the 2-1 decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that California's Proposition 8 ban did not further "responsible procreation," which was at the heart of the argument by the ban's supporters.
"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 as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples," the ruling reads.

But the appeals court did not address whether marriage was a fundamental right available to same-sex couples as well as heterosexuals, focusing instead specifically on Prop 8.

Some lawyers predicted that the narrow ruling would lead the Supreme Court to limit itself to deciding on the California measure or to refusing the case altogether.

Gay rights supporters have traveled a bumpy road since the first legal U.S. gay marriage was conducted in Massachusetts in 2004. Some courts and legislatures have extended those rights, but voters have consistently opposed gay marriage.

California, the most populous state, joined the vast majority of U.S. states in outlawing same-sex marriage in 2008, when voters passed the ban known as Proposition 8.

That socially conservative vote by a state more known for hippies and Hollywood was seen as a watershed by both sides of the so-called culture wars, and two gay couples responded by filing the legal challenge currently making its way through the federal courts.

A federal judge in San Francisco struck down Proposition 8 in 2010, and gay marriage opponents appealed that ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Opponents of gay marriage have not decided whether to ask a larger 9th Circuit panel to hear the matter, or appeal directly to the Supreme Court, Andrew Pugno, general counsel for Protect Marriage and a lawyer on the team, said by email.

Court rules allow at least two weeks before a ruling takes effect, so same sex marriages cannot immediately resume in California, court spokesman Dave Madden said.


California gay marriage ban overturned, appeal planned | Reuters

Be interesting to see where it goes.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Gay Marriage ban - California - Unconstitutional

Gay Marriage ban - California - Unconstitutional

California gay marriage ban is unconstitutional, court rules - The Globe and Mail

A federal appeals court on Tuesday declared California’s same-sex marriage ban to be unconstitutional, putting the bitterly contested, voter-approved law on track for likely consideration by the U.S. Supreme Court.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that a lower court judge correctly interpreted the U.S. Constitution and Supreme Court precedents when he declared in 2010 that Proposition 8 was a violation of the civil rights of gays and lesbians.

However, the appeals court said gay marriages cannot resume in the state until the deadline passes for Proposition 8 sponsors to appeal to a larger panel of the 9th Circuit. If such an appeal is filed, gay marriages will remain on hold until it's resolved.

“Although the Constitution permits communities to enact most laws they believe to be desirable, it requires that there be at least a legitimate reason for the passage of a law that treats different classes of people differently. There was no such reason that Proposition 8 could have been enacted,” the ruling states.

Backers of Proposition 8 said they would ask the Supreme Court to overturn the 9th Circuit ruling.

“No court should presume to redefine marriage. No court should undercut the democratic process by taking the power to preserve marriage out of the hands of the people,” said Brian Raum, senior counsel for the Alliance Defence Fund, a Christian legal aid group based in Arizona that helped defend Proposition 8.

“We are not surprised that this Hollywood-orchestrated attack on marriage — tried in San Francisco — turned out this way. But we are confident that the expressed will of the American people in favour of marriage will be upheld at the Supreme Court,” he said.

American Foundation for Equal Rights President Chad Griffin, who formed the group along with director Rob Reiner to wage the court fight against Proposition 8, called the panel's ruling “a historic victory.”

“The message it sends to young LGBT people, not only here in California but across the country, (is) that you can't strip away a fundamental right, and gay marriage is a fundamental right that no one can strip away,” Mr. Griffin said. “Now that Proposition 8 has been declared unconstitutional, the people of California will very soon be able to once again realize their freedom to marry.”

More than 50 people who gathered outside the federal courthouse in downtown San Francisco greeted the ruling with cheers. They held signs and waved rainbow flags.

“Today's ruling is a victory for fairness, a victory for equality and a victory for justice,” said California Attorney-General Kamala Harris.

The appeals panel crafted a narrow decision that applies only to California, even though the court has jurisdiction in nine western states. California is the only one of those states where the ability for gays to marry was granted then rescinded.

“Whether under the Constitution same-sex couples may ever be denied the right to marry, a right that has long been enjoyed by opposite-sex couples, is an important and highly controversial question,” the court said. “We need not and do not answer the broader question in this case.”

The panel also said there was no evidence that former Chief U.S. Judge Vaughn Walker was biased and should have disclosed before he issued his decision that he was gay and in a long-term relationship with another man.

Proposition 8 backers had asked the 9th Circuit to set aside Judge Walker’s ruling on both constitutional grounds and because of the thorny issue of the judge’s personal life. It was the first instance of an American jurist’s sexual orientation being cited as grounds for overturning a court decision. Judge Walker publicly revealed he was gay after he retired. However, supporters of the gay marriage ban argued that he had been obliged to previously reveal whether he wanted to marry his partner – like the gay couples who sued to overturn the ban.

Judge Walker’s successor as the chief federal judge in Northern California, James Ware, rejected those claims, and the 9th Circuit held a hearing on the conflict-of-interest question in December.

California voters passed Proposition 8 with 52 per cent of the vote in November, 2008, five months after the state Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage by striking down a pair of laws that had limited marriage to a man and a woman.

The ballot measure inserted the one man-one woman provision into the California Constitution, thereby overruling the court’s decision. It was the first such ban to take away marriage rights from same-sex couples after they had already secured them and its passage followed the most expensive campaign on a social issue in the nation’s history.

The Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation and the Law, a think tank based at the University of California, Los Angeles, has estimated that 18,000 couples tied the knot during the four-month window before Proposition 8 took effect. The California Supreme Court upheld those marriages, but ruled that voters had properly enacted the law.

With same-sex marriages unlikely to resume in California any time soon, Love Honor Cherish, a gay rights group based in Los Angeles, plans to start gathering signatures for a November ballot initiative asking voters to repeal Proposition 8.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
Re: Gay Marriage ban - California - Unconstitutional

No Fair! I just posted that, lol.

At least this one has some traffic....me! :)

On the topic, glad to hear it and I hope the ball keeps rolling. Such a stupid thing for people to get worked up about anyway.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Re: Gay Marriage ban - California - Unconstitutional

No Fair! I just posted that, lol.

At least this one has some traffic....me! :)

On the topic, glad to hear it and I hope the ball keeps rolling. Such a stupid thing for people to get worked up about anyway.

My apologies. I did not notice that you had.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Re: Gay Marriage ban - California - Unconstitutional

Human idiocy = allowing anyone to get married IF they are "normal" enough. I think people with big ears shouldn't be allowed to get married unless they get married to people with regular ears.

No Fair! I just posted that, lol.

At least this one has some traffic....me! :)

On the topic, glad to hear it and I hope the ball keeps rolling. Such a stupid thing for people to get worked up about anyway.
lol.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Re: Gay Marriage ban - California - Unconstitutional

Human idiocy = allowing anyone to get married IF they are "normal" enough. I think people with big ears shouldn't be allowed to get married unless they get married to people with regular ears.

lol.

Amazing how we as people put others that are not the same as us in Ghettos. Sad reflection on society as a whole.
 

WLDB

Senate Member
Jun 24, 2011
6,182
0
36
Ottawa
Re: Gay Marriage ban - California - Unconstitutional

Step in the right direction.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
Re: It's About Time

lol I can imagine Coldstream's retort now: "the next thing the courts will say is that it will allow interspecies marriages, God will punt California into the ocean, blah blah blah."

lol, You know what would be really funny, if everyone posted this thread over and over and that was all he could see when he logged on tomorrow. Maybe his head would explode.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
California gay marriage ban overturned, appeal planned

(Reuters) - An appeals court on Tuesday found California's gay marriage ban unconstitutional in a case that may lead to a showdown in the Supreme Court.

Supporters of the ban said they would appeal the judgment, calling it "out of step with every other federal appellate and Supreme Court decision." Their appeal is likely to keep gay marriage in the state on hold pending future proceedings.

But the lawyers who won the appeals court round called the decision a milestone, and outside City Hall in San Francisco, a center for gay rights, dozens of same-sex couples hugged and kissed in public, cheering the ruling.

"It means we are included in the American Dream," said Joe Capley-Alfano, who married his husband, Frank, in the summer of 2008, a window of legal same-sex marriage in California.

The majority in the 2-1 decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that California's Proposition 8 ban did not further "responsible procreation," which was at the heart of the argument by the ban's supporters.
"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 as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples," the ruling reads.

But the appeals court did not address whether marriage was a fundamental right available to same-sex couples as well as heterosexuals, focusing instead specifically on Prop 8.

Some lawyers predicted that the narrow ruling would lead the Supreme Court to limit itself to deciding on the California measure or to refusing the case altogether.

Gay rights supporters have traveled a bumpy road since the first legal U.S. gay marriage was conducted in Massachusetts in 2004. Some courts and legislatures have extended those rights, but voters have consistently opposed gay marriage.

California, the most populous state, joined the vast majority of U.S. states in outlawing same-sex marriage in 2008, when voters passed the ban known as Proposition 8.

That socially conservative vote by a state more known for hippies and Hollywood was seen as a watershed by both sides of the so-called culture wars, and two gay couples responded by filing the legal challenge currently making its way through the federal courts.

A federal judge in San Francisco struck down Proposition 8 in 2010, and gay marriage opponents appealed that ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Opponents of gay marriage have not decided whether to ask a larger 9th Circuit panel to hear the matter, or appeal directly to the Supreme Court, Andrew Pugno, general counsel for Protect Marriage and a lawyer on the team, said by email.

Court rules allow at least two weeks before a ruling takes effect, so same sex marriages cannot immediately resume in California, court spokesman Dave Madden said.


California gay marriage ban overturned, appeal planned | Reuters

Be interesting to see where it goes.
 

shadowshiv

Dark Overlord
May 29, 2007
17,545
120
63
50
Does allowing gay people to marry really destroy society? Sheesh. As long as two people(adults) love each other, I don't give a rat's ass if they decide to get married or not. It should be their choice!

No Fair! I just posted that, lol.

At least this one has some traffic....me! :)

On the topic, glad to hear it and I hope the ball keeps rolling. Such a stupid thing for people to get worked up about anyway.

No worries. I just merged the two threads together.;)
 

Serryah

Executive Branch Member
Dec 3, 2008
8,960
2,069
113
New Brunswick
Re: It's About Time

lmao Super idea!

Indeed!



California gay marriage ban overturned, appeal planned

(Reuters) - An appeals court on Tuesday found California's gay marriage ban unconstitutional in a case that may lead to a showdown in the Supreme Court.

Supporters of the ban said they would appeal the judgment, calling it "out of step with every other federal appellate and Supreme Court decision." Their appeal is likely to keep gay marriage in the state on hold pending future proceedings.

But the lawyers who won the appeals court round called the decision a milestone, and outside City Hall in San Francisco, a center for gay rights, dozens of same-sex couples hugged and kissed in public, cheering the ruling.

"It means we are included in the American Dream," said Joe Capley-Alfano, who married his husband, Frank, in the summer of 2008, a window of legal same-sex marriage in California.

The majority in the 2-1 decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that California's Proposition 8 ban did not further "responsible procreation," which was at the heart of the argument by the ban's supporters.
"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 as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples," the ruling reads.

But the appeals court did not address whether marriage was a fundamental right available to same-sex couples as well as heterosexuals, focusing instead specifically on Prop 8.

Some lawyers predicted that the narrow ruling would lead the Supreme Court to limit itself to deciding on the California measure or to refusing the case altogether.

Gay rights supporters have traveled a bumpy road since the first legal U.S. gay marriage was conducted in Massachusetts in 2004. Some courts and legislatures have extended those rights, but voters have consistently opposed gay marriage.

California, the most populous state, joined the vast majority of U.S. states in outlawing same-sex marriage in 2008, when voters passed the ban known as Proposition 8.

That socially conservative vote by a state more known for hippies and Hollywood was seen as a watershed by both sides of the so-called culture wars, and two gay couples responded by filing the legal challenge currently making its way through the federal courts.

A federal judge in San Francisco struck down Proposition 8 in 2010, and gay marriage opponents appealed that ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Opponents of gay marriage have not decided whether to ask a larger 9th Circuit panel to hear the matter, or appeal directly to the Supreme Court, Andrew Pugno, general counsel for Protect Marriage and a lawyer on the team, said by email.

Court rules allow at least two weeks before a ruling takes effect, so same sex marriages cannot immediately resume in California, court spokesman Dave Madden said.


California gay marriage ban overturned, appeal planned | Reuters

Does allowing gay people to marry really destroy society? Sheesh. As long as two people(adults) love each other, I don't give a rat's ass if they decide to get married or not. It should be their choice!

Maybe the word "adults" should be emphasized, overemphasized, underlined, surrounded in flashing lights and neoned that way Coldstream will see it and not equate homosexuality to pedophilia or marrying someone's dog.
 

shadowshiv

Dark Overlord
May 29, 2007
17,545
120
63
50
Re: It's About Time

Maybe the word "adults" should be emphasized, overemphasized, underlined, surrounded in flashing lights and neoned that way Coldstream will see it and not equate homosexuality to pedophilia or marrying someone's dog.

Unfortunately, I doubt that would make much of a difference.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Re: Gay Marriage ban - California - Unconstitutional


Slow news day! :lol:

Does allowing gay people to marry really destroy society? Sheesh. As long as two people(adults) love each other, I don't give a rat's ass if they decide to get married or not. It should be their choice!



No worries. I just merged the two threads together.;)

I agree but should it be any more of a news item than a heterosexual marriage. It belongs in the social pages of a gay newspaper! :lol:
 

shadowshiv

Dark Overlord
May 29, 2007
17,545
120
63
50
Re: Gay Marriage ban - California - Unconstitutional

Slow news day! :lol:



I agree but should it be any more of a news item than a heterosexual marriage. It belongs in the social pages of a gay newspaper! :lol:

Yes, it should be more of a news item than heterosexual marriage, at least until it is fully legalized! As it stands right now, the two are not equal and that isn't right.
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
First of all you know what they say about people with big ears? Oh well its about time that
the Americans progressed out of the cave man ice age era. This is something that should
never have been an issue. The reason it is, is because the social conservative agenda put
it there. They feel threatened. They also feel it lessons the impact of their own marriage.
Imagine, thinking that is so insecure. People are afraid that if others have the same freedom
as they do, somehow threaten them and the institution of marriage. Mind you, people living
together will soon outnumber those with traditional marriages.
I think the American agenda should concentrate on providing jobs and a rebuilding of the
economy.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Re: Gay Marriage ban - California - Unconstitutional

Yes, it should be more of a news item than heterosexual marriage, at least until it is fully legalized! As it stands right now, the two are not equal and that isn't right.

Where is that carved in stone?