Over a Pajamas, they’re running my piece on yesterday’s California Supreme Court decision upholding Proposition 8:
With the California Supreme Court upholding Proposition 8 yesterday, the initiative Golden State voters approved last fall to amend our state’s constitution to recognize only unions between one man and one woman as marriages, advocates of gay marriage have their work cut out for them. Since the court refused to respond favorably to their opinion, they must go back to the people and ask them to reverse Prop 8. To do that, they’ll need make a better case than they did last fall.
While the court did overturn Prop 8, the decision was not entirely bleak for gay people. The court upheld the marriages of same-sex couples performed after it struck down state statutes limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples “but prior to the effective date of Proposition 8 remain valid.” Moreover, in its ruling, the court made clear that this was an issue of state constitutional jurisprudence:
. . . the principal issue before us concerns the scope of the right of the people, under the provisions of the California Constitution, to change or alter the state Constitution itself through the initiative process so as to incorporate such a limitation as an explicit section of the state Constitution.
You can read the rest here.
Over at the Corner, Williams Duncan offered the best short summary of the decision I have found on the web:
The court said Proposition 8 does not have “even a minimal effect” on the framework of government in California. If it had such an effect, it would have had to be approved by the legislature before going to voters. The court also said Proposition 8 did not change the judicial function or interfere with the separation of powers.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.