Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...AG calls for rejection of Prop 8
12.19.2008 8:58pm EST
(San Francisco, California) California Attorney General Jerry Brown told the state Supreme Court Friday that it should invalidate Proposition 8, the voter approved amendment to the state constitution that bans same-sex marriage.
In a brief submitted to the court Friday, Brown’s office said the measure should be invalidated because it deprives people of the right to marry—an aspect of liberty that the Supreme Court has concluded is guaranteed by the California Constitution.“Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification,” Brown’s brief said.
Brown argued that in order to invalidate such a fundamental right, the court “must determine that there is a compelling justification to do so.”
But in the marriage cases that the court ruled on earlier this year, striking down the ban on gay marriage “the court found that no such compelling justification exists. Accordingly, Proposition 8 must be stricken,” the brief said.
Brown also said that he believes that same-sex marriages entered into between June 16 and November 4, 2008 are valid and recognized in California regardless of whether Proposition 8 is upheld.
The position was a surprise to some. Although he personally supports same-sex marriage many thought as Attorney General Brown would ask the court to uphold Prop 8. Brown’s office said that as Attorney General he is obligated to argue state constitutional law, which is what he did.
The court had ordered Brown’s office to submit its brief by today in reaction to legal challenges to Prop 8.
Following passage of the proposition the American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal and the National Center for Lesbian Rights filed lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the vote. They were joined by additional suits by the cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles.
The lawsuits charge that Proposition 8 is invalid because the initiative process was improperly used in an attempt to undo the constitution’s core commitment to equality for everyone, by eliminating a fundamental right from just one group – lesbian and gay Californians.
They also say that Proposition 8 improperly attempts to prevent the courts from exercising their essential constitutional role of protecting the equal protection rights of minorities.
The suits say that under the California Constitution, such radical changes to the organizing principles of state government cannot be made by simple majority vote through the initiative process, but instead must, at a minimum, go through the state legislature first.
The California Constitution itself sets out two ways to alter the document that sets the most basic rules about how state government works, the groups said in a statement.
Through the initiative process, voters can make relatively small changes to the constitution. But any measure that would change the underlying principles of the constitution must first be approved by the legislature before being submitted to the voters.
That didn’t happen with Proposition 8, and that’s why it’s invalid, the petitioners said.
The Supreme Court set Friday as the deadline for Brown’s office to reply and it said that in addition to hearing arguments on the validity of the vote it wanted to address what effect, if any, a ruling upholding the amendment would have on the estimated 18,000 same-sex marriages that were sanctioned in California before Election Day.
In addition to the brief from attorneys for the Protect Marriage Coalition, the umbrella group that put Prop 8 on the ballot. It argued that the will of the people must be respected by the court and that the measure also invalidated those marriages performed prior to the vote.
The coalition has hired Ken Starr who led the inquiry into President Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica L. Lewinsky, to argue its case before the high court. It said it needed a high profile attorney because it did not trust Brown to fight for Prop 8.
The court is expected to study the briefs and then ask for comment from the litigants. Oral arguments in the case could be heard as early as March but a ruling would not come for months after that.
RODNEY MORE wrote: “Obama is either A.) politically retarded thinking he could win the votes of the religious right or B.) just as homophobic as Warren or C.) both.”
It’s “C”. And yes, Rodney, I too nearly lost a good friend as well who at first saw Obama as a fraud, but then jumped onboard the bandwagon out of fear that the Repugnant-cans might win again. I sympathize with those who believed that we were just given a “Sophie’s Choice”. The old “Lesser of two Evils” cliché.
On a related note, I defy any person of color who voted with the 70% of their ilk to deny us our equality and then who will, not doubt, join the predictable choirs, whining “activist judges” and denouncing the California Supreme Court, when/if they strike down Prop 8.
The irony of this coming year is that it is the fiftieth anniversary of Brown -versus- Topeka Board of Education and the US Supreme Court decision which desegregated public schools. It could also be a wonderful landmark year for the GLBT community if Prop 8 in California is overturned on this historical anniversary.
Upon another ironic albeit both forward and backwards stepping milestone, it is also worth noting that we just elected a pro-segregationist Black man as President of the “not-so” United States.
Still, I have every hope that eventually common sense and decency will wins out. I sincerely believe that we are on the winning side of history. Regretfully, so many of our fellow travelers have forgotten that we are still forced to endure many of the same injustices from which they, and their children, have since been liberated — and with our support when they most desperately needed it. So now where is their support?
Instead, they who once were persecuted now join hand-in-hand with the persecutors. How utterly shameful. History will remember that as well. That is their shameful contribution to the continuing legacy of liberation whose fruits they once voraciously reaped, but in returned, they now selfishly deny to others who are still starving for freedom.
Moral reciprocity is something that should be expected and it should have been forthcoming, but the Black Community’s lack of empathy towards the suffering of another oppressed minority says lot about the collective morality, or lack there of, by a formerly subjugated group in our society.
Still, kudos for Jerry Brown. It is refreshing to see allies who have nothing to gain from our struggle other than the gratification of being part of an ongoing effort to uphold the concept of equal justice for all. Unlike Obama, Attorney General Brown is not an equivocator on human rights. He does not weigh on the Scale of Justice his own political ambitions balanced against the equal rights of his fellow citizens. Truly Jerry Brown is a not only a great American, but also an ethically superior person compared to our soon to be President.
~ Bud Evans
http://rainfish2000.blogspot.com
“Lets not dilute the word ‘bigot. Not everyone who disagrees with gay marriage is a bigots.We are calling Obama a bigot now?”
Yes Obama is indeed a bigot, a soft bigot, but a bigot nonetheless. And in all honesty soft bigotry is harder to defeat than the average bigoted redneck on the street, because Obama gives homophobia a veneer of acceptability.
In all honesty the Rick Warren scandal is very much symbolism, it’s not that important on the grander scheme of things. However it was the feather that broke the camel’s back. HomophObama has never supported gay equality, he’s always opposed marriage equality and he was complicit in the passage of Prop 8. I myself didn’t vote for him, because I saw that he didn’t care about gay people and our concerns. I’ve lost friends because of their irrational Obamamania. All of these things culminated when Obama invited one of the biggest homophobic generals from the culture war to lead the benediction at the inauguration. All of this in the name of diversity of course. Obama’s from Chicago, why doesn’t he invite the neo-Nazis and holocaust victims from Skokie and ask them to seek common ground!?! It’ll never happen. So why the hell, should gay and lesbian people be asked to sit down at the table of brotherhood with a bigot who uses his position to deny us our human rights? That is NOT diversity, that is politics as usual. Obama is either a.) politically retarded thinking he could win the votes of the religious right or b.) just as homophobic as Warren or c.) both.
Obama’s and Warren’s position on marriage equality is the same. Why is Warren more homophobic than Obama? Because Obama is black(or half black)? Lest we forget Obama’s black Californian voters didn’t hesitate for one second to deny us civil rights. Rick Warren, in my opinion, deserves more respect for putting action behind his belief. He opposes marriage equality and he’s willing to fight against it. Obama opposes marriage equality yet he wants to play both sides so he can seem moderate and not scare away he’s sworn enemies(the religious right). Yet he’s shot himself in the foot, he’s alienated white progressives and gay and lesbian Americans who supported him long before black America joined the bandwagon. And I am hoping, that in 2012, we(white progressives and gays) are part of his downfall. I myself will vote for a candidate who supports gay equality and marriage equality, regardless of their party, even if they’re in a “third party”.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Inspired by the recent
passing of Proposition 8 in CA and hate crime attacks in NYC 2008,
The charity dance single
“FREE TO LOVE”
written and perfomed by Lovari (www.myspace.com/Lovari) and also
featuring Harmonica Sunbeam,Scandelle,Janifer,Geo Vaughn,&Bry’NT
“FREE TO LOVE” is available for sale
as an mp3 charity single on http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/ouryouthorg
All proceeds will benefit Our Youth Organization, The Joey DiPaolo Foundation, A.N.G.E.L. Initiative, and various Anti Prop 8 organizations.
“FREE TO LOVE” is currently available for listening on http://www.myspace.com/Lovari, http://www.myspace.com/our_youth , WBAI 99.5 FM (NYC), WKTU 103.5 FM (NYC), WKJCE FM (PA), and is supported
members of the Anti Prop 8 organization http://www.JoinTheImpact.com
Contact Information:
Anthony Lovari
(718) 306-2357
LovariMusic@Yahoo.Com
RJLigier said:
“After more than a fifty year free ride in the public and private sectors based on fraudulent and fallacious research, the neurotic among us still want special treatment. I think it’s time for MRI polygraphs for the LGBT legal and medical professional communities.”
Um, what exactly are you talking about? The junk science that got Paul Cameron unfrocked as a psychologist or psychiatrist or whatever he was?
What precisely is an “MRI polygraph?” “MRI” stands for “magnetic resonance imaging;” a “polygraph” is a lie detector. AFAIK the two are not used together, except on “House MD” .
If *I* was getting “a free ride” the past fifty years (I’m sixty-four), *I* certainly didn’t notice it.
Bud Burgoon-Clark
San Diego CA USA
happily and LEGALLY married to my husband
after a 30+ year “engagement”
Tony said:
“think “ALL GAY PEOPLE” from around the country should move to one of the states in the west coast …”
No, we should have a disciplined, coherent, UNITED, WELL-FUNDED *fifty state* strategy. It worked for Obama; it COULD work for US, if we’d get our political ACT together. And it will have to be a LONG-TERM strategy.
Bring in pro-equality legislation and nominate pro-equality candidates in MISSISSIPPI and the rest of the “Old South.”
LGBTQA people in THOSE sad states need our support, probably more than those in “blue” states.
Gay people are NOT safe outside the city limits of large cities and university towns in red states (if THEN).
File a BLIZZARD of lawsuits WHENEVER LGBTQA people experience ANY kind of discrimination.
GIVE $$$ to the ACLU; they’re the most visible and effective legal advocates.
I’m withholding donations to most gay organizations until they can prove to me that they are going to use my money EFFECTIVELY, rather than for posh award dinners and fancy offices.
Bud Burgoon-Clark
San Diego CA USA
I think “ALL GAY PEOPLE” from around the country should move to one of the states in the west coast and make it our own from small business to government. we would be able to write the laws the way we need them to be.
Sarrellec…we’ll see. Let’s just hope that is the judgement, then we are back to the old, very, very old ‘ACTIVIST Judges’ again.
“The suits say that under the California Constitution, such radical changes to the organizing principles of state government cannot be made by simple majority vote through the initiative process, but instead must, at a minimum, go through the state legislature first.”
**************
And, as we all know, California State Legislature already passed a bill guaranteeing same-sex marriage, just as the very same people who supported Prop. 8 previously demanded had to be done instead of “radical judges” approving same-sex marriage.
And Ah-nold vetoed the bill.
Ah-nold said he would not veto the bill again, should it come through the legislature, so, these anachronistic hypocrites created Prop 8.
Judges, legislature, vote…however “they” say something HAS to be done, they inevitably change the rules when that test is satisfied.
I do wonder what the next tactic will be when Prop 8 is determined to have been fundamentally unconstitutional?
That such laws shouldn’t be left up to the “radical” constitution?