Today the California Supreme Court heard oral arguments on whether to uphold or strike down Proposition 8. As the hearings wore on it became increasing clear the court seems pre-disposed to letting Prop 8 stand, averse to going against the will of the people, no matter how egregious.
While in general valiantly argued, the case brought forward by AG Jerry Brown’s associate, Christopher Krueger, Senior Assistant AG, didn’t do the LGBT community any favors. Krueger seemed ill-prepared, and his arguments based on cases dating back to the 1800s and the concept of “natural law” didn’t impress the judges. At one point one judge tried to withdraw a question due a muddled answer. It seemed to dilute the arguments to overturn Prop 8 up to that point.
Below are couple of highlights from the hearings…
In this instance Ken Starr is asserting that the will of the voters should hold even when stripping away rights, provided they are well-informed and know what they are voting on. But unfortunately this wasn’t the case. A well-organized misinformation campaign orchestrated by the proponents of Prop 8, duped voters into believing gay marriage would be taught in schools, that it would harm their children and families, and make religious institutions vulnerable to lawsuits. All categorically untrue. In the end we had an electorate, many misinformed and misled, strip away the civil rights of a protected minority.
The court however appears reluctant to invalidate the existing 18,000 same-sex marriages as evidenced below.
It’s interesting that Ken Starr makes a point that Prop 8 doesn’t invalidate the marriages, he simply believes that they are made unrecognized and invalid.
Sorry but, WTF is the difference? Associate Justice Carol Corrigan response at the close of the clip is dead on.
The court will rule in 90 days or less. Regardless of the outcome, we should take to the streets, wether in victory, or take demand our civil rights.
UPDATE: Earlier today, Attorney General Jerry Brown issues this release recommending the court to review Prop 8 and that an “immediate stay” should not be granted.
Attorney General Brown Urges California Supreme Court to Review Constitutionality of Proposition 8
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 17, 2008
Attorney General Brown Urges California Supreme Court to Review Constitutionality of Proposition 8
SACRAMENTO—California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today urged the California Supreme Court to accept review of the legal challenges to Proposition 8 and for this matter of widespread concern to be “promptly resolved.”
“The profound importance of the issues raised by Proposition 8 warrants that this matter be reviewed and promptly resolved by the California Supreme Court.” Attorney General Brown said.
In a set of briefs filed with the Court today, Attorney General Brown wrote that: “review by this Court is necessary to ensure uniformity of decision, finality and certainty for the citizens of California. The constitutionality of the change created by Proposition 8 impacts whether same-sex marriages may issue in California and whether same-sex marriages from other states will be recognized here. There is significant public interest in prompt resolution of the legality of Proposition 8. The Court can provide certainty and finality in this matter.”
Typically, matters are brought before lower courts before the Supreme Court hears the case. However, petitioners have asked the Supreme Court to accept the review directly to bring an early resolution to the matter.
Attorney General Brown opposes a stay on Proposition 8, arguing that it would increase uncertainty related to marriages performed in California. The Attorney General’s brief states that “the public interest would be best served not by issuing a temporary stay, but by an expedited resolution of the important issues raised by the petitions.”
Attorney General Brown continues to believe that same-sex marriages performed between June 17 and November 4, 2008 remain valid and will be upheld by the Court.
While the Mormons have received the majority of press for their financial support of Proposition 8 (over $20 million), Catholics and the Catholic Church have also played a major role in its passage.
Catholics for the Common Good (CCG) based in Daly City just outside of San Francisco, mobilized local Catholics through prayer, education, fundraising and volunteering to pass Proposition 8. Catholics also played a large role in the passage of Proposition 22 in 2000 which defined marriage as being between one man and one woman.
CCG is chaired by founder Bill (William) May, a professor of Moral Theology who also serves as a chair for Catholics for Protectmarriage.com. May has also appeared on various media outlets throughout the SF Bay area speaking against Proposition 8.
In an interview with the Catholic Voice in early September 2008, May said, “We’re asking people to volunteer to help in parishes, to participate in telephoning, talking with neighbors. This is a really important issue. Marriage is the foundation of the family. People are very upset that the Supreme Court overruled the will of the people.”
Also in September, May sent out a plea to Catholics urging them to make sacrifices and re-order priorities, recruit volunteers and acquire and distribute yard signs.
May appears in the television clips below.
In addition to supporting traditional over same-sex marriage, May also rejected adoption by same-sex couples in 2006, then performed by Catholic Charities of San Francisco. May cited an official Vatican document that stated “Allowing children to be adopted by persons living in such unions would actually mean doing violence to these children, in the sense that their condition of dependency would be used to place them in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development.” and are “Gravely immoral.”
“At this point we are beyond tolerance and acceptance, and we are now facing compliance and obedience to a new standard of marriage, of the human person. People have been tolerant and accepting as a culture – but this law, this court decision, has changed the standard and created a new one… Catholics and others who understand the meaning and nature of marriage will be counter-cultural and seen as discriminatory or bigoted. It opens the way for lawsuits and challenges to tax exemption.
“The stakes are high. We are battling for the survival of the family as we know it, as God established it… Proposition 8, the Marriage Protection Act, is the most important thing that has ever been on the ballot in California history! People around the world are watching carefully.”
It’s clear now that the strong push by Catholics of ProtectMarriage.com and other Catholics groups were ultimately successful. In a field poll one week prior to the election, Catholics accounted for 24% of the electorate, voting 44% Yes on 8. Exit polls on election day showed Catholics accounting for 30% of the electorate and 64% voting Yes on 8, an increase of 20%.
Assuming the projections in the exit polls hold across the entire voting population, of the 10.3 million Californians who voted, approximate 3 million were Catholic, and nearly 2 million of those voted Yes on Proposition 8. That’s a 1 million voter difference in the final week prior to election day.
By comparison, in CNN exit polls African Americans accounted for 1 million of the Californian voting electorate, 70% voting Yes, or seven hundred thousand voters.
Many believe the high voter turnout of African Americans led to the passage of Proposition 8. What about the Catholics?
Several months ago Barack Obama came out against Proposition 8 but hasn’t said much in the way since. Until tonight.
On the 10/30/08 edition of NBC’s Nightly News, Brian Williams asked Obama about his approach to picking Supreme Court justices in lieu of a litmus test. Half way through the answer, and unprompted, Obama brings up marriage and the right to privacy.
“The right to marry who you please, isn’t in the constitution. But I think all of us assume, a state decided to pass a law saying Brian, you can’t marry the woman you love, that you would think that was unconstitutional. Well, where does the come from? I think it comes from a right to privacy.”
CCG is chaired by founder Bill (William) May, a professor of Moral Theology who also serves as a chair for Catholics for Protectmarriage.com. May has also appeared on various media outlets throughout the SF Bay area speaking against Proposition 8.