California Supreme Court upholds Prop 8
Bookworm on May 26 2009 at 10:09 am | Filed under: Uncategorized
I can’t get hold of the California Supreme Court website, which is overloaded, but BNO News has this headline:
BULLETIN — CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT DECLARES 18,000 EXISTING SAME-SEX MARRIAGES VALID BUT UPHOLDS PROPOSITION 8.
In other words, the Court performed as predicted, based upon hints at oral argument. It’s very weird, though, that there will be 18,000 legal same-sex marriages, and no others. That in itself is a lawsuit in the making.
Related posts:
- California Supreme court looks at business affirmative action.
- Links to good discussions of the Calif Supreme Court decision
- Quotas headed for Supreme Court
Email This Post To A Friend
5 Responses to “California Supreme Court upholds Prop 8”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
That may well be what the court intended. The reason why it did not invalidate the 18,000 same-sex marriages is because that would have invalidated the court’s original presumptuous finding of a “right” that—who woulda figured?—had been embedded in the California constitution all this time.
So, if somebody sues, the court will get to revisit the matter. Who’s to say it won’t at that point mumble something about “justice denied” and “this isn’t in the spirit of our constitution” and reverse itself and declare Prop. 8 unconstitutional after all?
Then what? A lawsuit against the California supremes before the Sotomayor court?
I am not sure of the legal aspect of this decision, so I am asking would it (upholding Prop
be like a ‘grandfather clause’. I live in a condominium, no dogs/cats allowed. Prior to the rule there were several pets who are able to remain with their owners, but no new pets allowed.
p.s. I have no idea why when I typed in number eight a happy face showed up.
Re the happy face….
It’s a sneak liberal attack…!!!
Re: the 18,000 still valid marriages…
Got thinking about this…
If the Calif Supremes recognize the validity of the Proposition, then wasn’t it valid from the time it was approved? If that’s true, how can the marriages be valid?