Comments on: California Legislature to Request Prop 8 Rejection

By: SharonB

SharonB — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 20:22:11 +0000

This is exactly the way to go! I hope it passes with wide margins.

By: David C.

David C. — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 23:36:09 +0000

Probably the real danger is that a revision/amendment procedural error would be allowed to go unchallenged were the legislature not to speak up. The usurpation of a right/responsibility of the legislature should not go unchallenged.

This is probably the result of a defect in the whole initiative process. No initiative should be allowed to be placed upon the ballot without a determination being made as to whether the legislature has some duty to act first under the constitution. It would not be hard to fix, but it would need to be done carefully to avoid the creation of more ambiguity.

By: QueerinSoCal

QueerinSoCal — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 22:29:21 +0000

I agree that this is dangerous territory – and I’m relatively sure that the legislature knows it. But I see two dangers here, one is the rejection of the outcome of an election by the legislature, the other is the gutting of Constitutional rights by a bare majority vote. When weighing the dangers, I have to come down on the side of maintaining civil rights.

And I really do believe that I’d feel the same way even if the minority in question was one I disagreed with. I don’t like that the ACLU has argued for the right of KKK members to march on MLK day, and I don’t think I could bring myself to do it in their position, but I’m glad someone is there to do it. A Constitution that only works for the popular groups isn’t a Constitution I want to live under.

By: mgh

mgh — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 07:49:20 +0000

not to be dismissive of this effort, but this is well out of the legislature’s hands.

just as the legislature couldn’t overrule the prior proposition which amended the statutes, they can’t try to “undo” this one by forcing the AG to stop defending it.

we have a duty to our constitutions, as awful as they may be…this is dangerous ground to be treading on, unless they want to acknowledge this as an act of civil disobedience (in which case, full steam ahead, but admit it).

By: Louie

Louie — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 05:46:23 +0000

And lets not forget that Prop. 8 passed by a slim majority. Less than 5%?

By: queerunity

queerunity — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 04:32:27 +0000

Well Richard it shows the controversy over whether this was legal, but even if the house did say it was wrong and voted in favor of repeal I am not sure it does anything. It all lies in the hands of the supreme court at this point.

By: Richard W. Fitch

Richard W. Fitch — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 04:03:37 +0000

It would seem that the mere fact both chambers have initiated bills with such specific language would make it more than just symbolic even if it doesn’t pass. When it DOES pass, the implied endorsement for the CA Supreme Crt to nullify Prop 8 is overwhelming. If same-sex marriage rights had not already been on the books it would be another story; but emphasizing that citizens have been stripped of their rights cannot but make most CA citizens realize the gravity of this “rule by majority” debacle. -rwf – Indy

By: queerunity

queerunity — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 03:43:47 +0000

i hope it passes, would it have any bearing or would it be purely symbolic?

By: Jason D

Jason D — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 03:15:02 +0000

someone save California from the tyranny of their elected officials!!

You know, people used to stand up for important traditions like bigotry, paranoid, and xenophobia.

What’s the use of being a majority if the courts, the legislature, and the governor want to take your precious bully clubs away?

THE NOIVE!