Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...Vigils set for eve of Prop 8 arguments
02.26.2009 4:28pm EST
(San Francisco, California) Same-sex couples and their supporters will hold candlelight vigils in at least 15 cities across California the night before the state Supreme Court hears oral arguments challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8.
Among the major cities are San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego and Palm Springs.The March 4 vigils are being hosted by Marriage Equality, Equality California and local LGBT rights groups.
Prop 8 was passed by voters by a slim 52 percent in November.
The American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal and the National Center for Lesbian Rights immediately 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 written brief to the court.
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.
California Attorney General Jerry Brown is also asking the Court to invalidate Proposition 8 on the ground that certain fundamental rights, including the right to marry, are inalienable and can not be put up for a popular vote.
In a brief submitted to the court, 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.
On the other side, Protect Marriage Coalition, the umbrella group that put Prop 8 on the ballot, argues in its brief to the court 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 Lewinsky, to argue its case before the high court.
The Supreme Court justices will have to determine three main issues: Is Prop 8 invalid because it constitutes a revision of, rather than an amendment to, the California Constitution; Does it violate the separation of powers doctrine under the California Constitution; and if it is legal what is the status of the 18,000 marriages that were performed last year.
After the court hears the legal arguments it will be several months before a decision is issued.
“they had to clean up the mess they made in a half a decade of judicially recognized discrimination.”
Oops, should read “in a half a century…”
otter – What was the purpose of Brown v. Board? It was to overturn 50 years of previous court rulings endorsing discrimination in education! Which gets back to my point – you can’t rely on the courts to do the right thing. The Supreme Court didn’t come in like heroes and clean up the mess made by legislation – they had to clean up the mess they made in a half a decade of judicially recognized discrimination.
Brown v. Board didn’t establish civil rights. If it did, we wouldn’t have had the civil rights marches and the Civil Rights Act which passed TEN YEARS after B v. B.
Discrimination against race is a direct violation of the Constitution. Discrimination against choices is a fundamental function of society and government.
OttO,
I am no historian, but I seem to remember that Brown v. Board of Education was a Supreme Court case that rendered a verdict which overturned the policy of “separate but equal”. SO the high court played a pivotal role in shifting the culture.
We HAVE been thrown to the dogs, left to fight our battle state by state, year after year, lie after lie. Consider what a horrible patchwork of laws black folks would have to navigate today if each state could have determined a unique position on civil rights and accommodations one by one back in the 60’s. Mind Bending isn’t it?
Democracy is failing us…and gutting it’s own principles in the process.
I’ve had enough smarmy, double talking, back stabbing politicians using me as a bargaining chip with the UNHOLY ROLLERS.
RICK N NICK – You need to bone up on your history. Majorities supported civil rights. The Civil Rights Act was passed by Congress, it was NOT decided by the courts. The courts were responsible for notorious for upholding discrimination, for great judicial interpretations like Dred Scott. Don’t put so much faith in courts – we have virtually no say or input in what they decide and when they are wrong, it’s devastating.
Morgan – I’m surprised to learn that the concept of “will of the people” is a “far radical right wing” concept. Opposing the will of the people isn’t radical? If something is the will of the people, regardless of whether it’s right or wrong, it’s hardly radical.
The phrase “will of the people” is often repeated by the far radical right wing to defend Prop H8 and other ugly antigay lawa, amendments, etc that ill-informed voters get to vote on thus stripping away civil rights via ballot box.
HUGE PROP 8 PROTEST IN WEST HOLLYWOOD ON THE EVE OF JUSTICE(MARCH 4TH, 2009). ON SANTA MONICA AND SAN VICENTE AT 6 PM!!!
The function of the courts is to protect the minorities from the tyranny of the majority.
Women, blacks, Jews, yes Catholics, Mormons and now gays. And the real shame is how some of these groups have taken their lessons from their enemies of their past.
If you belong to one of these churches, you should be picketing it, and damn well burning your bibles in front of it.
Absolutely Rick N Nick . It doesn’t matter how many there are: 10, 1000 or 52% these bullies, these scaredy cats, lynched us at the polls! This is simply … about … EQUALITY ….its not a yes or no question!
Equality should never be decided by a majority, it should JUST BE Equality for ALL Human Beings !!
THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE NEVER VOTED FOR CIVIL RIGHTS FOR BLACKS IF IT WERE LEFT UP TO THEM !! THAT IS WHY THE COURTS HAD TO DECIDE. ! WE WERE THROWN OUT TO THE WOLVES,,,,,,,,,, SHOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPENED !!!!