Comments on: Affirmed: Appeals Court Upholds Decision Striking Down Prop 8

By: Mark F.

Mark F. — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 19:36:25 +0000

Ryan:

Yes.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 19:06:06 +0000

The fact that the ruling is so narrow is a bit upsetting. Does that not mean that SCOTUS can sidestep the issue of the constitutionality of gay marriage entirely, and just rule only on Prop 8? Meaning, even if they rule in our favor, it will only affect California?

By: iDavid

iDavid — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:46:15 +0000

Anyone have an idea of the pros and cons of granting an extended stay when appealed? It seems legit that there should not be one granted. However maybe so.

By: Charles

Charles — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:40:29 +0000

It certainly is going to be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court.

By: Theo

Theo — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:39:16 +0000

Just read through it thanks to a pdf copy made available at NOMBlog. (Thanks, NOM!)

The best thing about it is that there is a lot of discussion as to why Prop 8 is unconstitutional b/c it stripped an existing right away from gays. The court explicitly avoids the question of whether there is a fundamental right to gay marriage even when it has never been extended as a matter of practice to gays. So the decision would not impact all the other states; it is peculiar to CA’s circumstances and possibly to the circumstances prevalent in IA and NH. This analysis is far more likely to be accepted by the Supreme Court and it is clear that the decision was written with that appeal in mind.

On the other hand, the decision was authored by Reinhardt, who is a lightning rod. And it is a bit breezy and casual in tone at times, which is probably not helpful in a case like this. These are minor quibbles. Over all, based on my first read, it looks really good.

The dissent is not all that bad, as it gins up the issue of the level of judicial scrutiny afforded sexual orientation, an issue on which I believe we have a majority on the Supreme Court.

Best of all, this decision is very likely to make Brian Brown cry, just as he did in the NY Senate gallery last summer. Anything that makes Brian cry is good.

By: Charles

Charles — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:36:29 +0000

Well this is interest news. Times, they are changing.

Last night I was watching O’Reilly and he was defending Ellen against the Million Moms, saying they were acting like Senator McCarthy in calling for her firing by J. C. Penny. Million Moms had refused to send anyone to appear on O’Reilly, but there was someone there to make their case. She was made to sound like the bigot that she is.

By: Regan DuCasse

Regan DuCasse — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:33:38 +0000

True that, Lindoro.
They’ll call THIS panel of judges ‘activist’. They’ll accuse them of legislating from the bench. They already went after Walker’s sexual orientation as the foundation of his decision, rather than THEIR lack of facts and evidence.
To say nothing of his professional RECORD regarding OTHER cases involving gay people.

None of that will matter. The hew and cry will be ‘unfair’! to the VOTERS of CA.
That democracy, religious freedom and judicial impartiality are under the influence of MILITANT gay terrorists.

I can hardly wait.
Can you?

By: Lindoro Almaviva

Lindoro Almaviva — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:22:27 +0000

And the people at NOM start foaming at the mouth, ripping their clothes and crying foul in

3
2
1….