Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Tar.Aldarion

MagicMarker wrote: »

The ad before it is fantastic!! I want old spice!!

He has loads of vids, they are sooo good.


This post is now diamonds.

bodice ripper

as an american, I am thrilled.

I thought we held these truths to be self evident.

Stinicker

sink wrote: »

New Law Would Ban Marriages Between People Who Don't Love Each Other

Does this mean I can marry myself?

gizmo

Found this pretty amusing too.

MagicMarker

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/12/california.same.sex.ruling/index.html?hpt=T1

Judge gives the green light for same-sex marriage in California

A federal judge ruled on Thursday to allow same-sex couples to marry in California, starting on August 18, handing another victory to supporters of gay rights in a case that both sides have said is likely to end up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage last week, ruling that voter-approved Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution. Walker had issued a temporary stay on his decision, which on Thursday he said he would lift.

The high-profile case is being watched closely by supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage, as many say it is likely to make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. If it does, the case could result in a landmark decision on whether people in the United States are allowed to marry others of the same sex.

Same-sex marriage is legal in five U.S. states and in the District of Columbia, while civil unions are permitted in New Jersey. The five states are Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, Iowa and New Hampshire.

Same-sex couples in California were permitted to marry, briefly, before Proposition 8 passed in 2008.
"Today's ruling means that in less than one week, equality under the law will be restored for millions of loving families across California," said Rick Jacobs, founder of the Courage Campaign.

Proposition 8 is part of a long line of seesaw rulings, court cases, debates and protests over the controversial issue of same-sex marriage. Proposition 8 defines marriage as a union between a man and woman and passed in California with some 52 percent of the vote in November 2008.

Opponents of same-sex marriage have said their best bet lies with higher courts and have vowed to appeal the federal judge's ruling. The case would head next to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals before possibly going to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In his decision, Walker expressed his doubt that an appeal would be successful.

"Based on the trial record, which establishes that Proposition 8 violates plaintiffs' equal protection and due process rights, the court cannot conclude that proponents have shown a likelihood of success on appeal," he wrote.

People in the United States are split over the idea of allowing same-sex marriage. Forty-nine percent of respondents said they think gay and lesbian couples have the constitutional right to marry and to have their marriages recognized by law, while 51 percent say those rights do not exist, according to a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll.

rainbow kirby

Fantastic!

Links234

Yay!

MagicMarker

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/17/same.sex.marriage/index.html?hpt=T1

An appeals court ruling temporarily blocking same-sex marriages from resuming in California drew strong reactions from opponents and supporters of the state's controversial 2008 referendum on the issue.

Couples hoping to marry rushed to cancel their plans after an order from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals late Monday set aside a federal judge's decision earlier this month that would have permitted same-sex marriages to resume in California as early as Wednesday.

And advocates on both sides of the issue said they were prepared to make their arguments in court.

"This delay is just really going to screw us up," said Harry Seaman, who was planning to marry his boyfriend Friday afternoon.

Friends and family had already been invited to celebrate, he said.

"We got the first appointment we could get," he said. "I knew something was going to happen, but I just didn't know it was going to happen before we even got a chance."
The appeals court Monday set a fast schedule to hear the merits of the constitutional challenge to Proposition 8, the 2008 initiative defining marriage as only between one man and one woman.

Oral arguments will now be held the week of December 6, meaning a decision on whether same-sex couples can legally wed likely will not be decided until sometime next year.

Andy Pugno, an attorney representing supporters of Proposition 8, said California's voters should be happy about Monday's ruling.

"We just think today is a good day for the voters in general, to see the vote of the people actually upheld, even though it's not the final word yet," he told CNN affiliate KCRA. "We still have appeals to go through, but for the time being the vote of the people has been upheld."

Opponents of Proposition 8 said they were disappointed by the ruling, but planned to continue their fight.

"Every additional day that couples must wait to marry again in California is painful, but despite the terrible disappointment for the many couples whose right to marry has been delayed yet again, today's ruling includes another significant victory for our side," Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, said in a statement. "The court did the right thing by putting the case on a fast track and specifically ordering that Prop 8 proponents show why they have a legal right to appeal."
Opponents of Proposition 8 will not appeal Monday's ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, according to spokesman Yousef Robb with the American Foundation for Equal Rights.

Opponents could ask the Supreme Court to intervene on the narrow question of whether to allow the stay to be lifted, but both sides of the debate agree the odds of the justices getting involved at this stage are very slim.

The case has had an up-and-down series of rulings and referendums. The state's high court had allowed same-sex marriage, but then the voter referendum two years ago passed with 52 percent of the vote. The California Supreme Court subsequently allowed that initiative to stand, saying it represented the will of the people.

Opponents of the law next filed a federal challenge, saying the law violated 14th Amendment constitutional protections of due process and equal protection.
Judge Vaughn Walker on August 4 agreed, ruling that the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage violated federal civil rights laws.

His 136-page opinion concluded that Proposition 8 "fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license." The Reagan-appointed judge added, "Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples."
Same sex marriage is currently legal in five states and in the District of Columbia, while civil unions are permitted in New Jersey. The five states are Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, Iowa, and New Hampshire.

Walker's landmark ruling assured a swift federal appeal that ultimately may reach the Supreme Court. One sticking point could be whether Proposition 8 supporters in court -- all private citizens and groups -- have legal "standing" to continue appealing the case. State officials, including the governor and attorney general, support individual same-sex couples challenging the law. Such state "actors" traditionally defend voter referendums and legislation.

Some legal experts say if the appeals court eventually rules Proposition 8 backers cannot bring their petition for relief, the Supreme Court may not seek to intervene further, giving no clear guidance on the larger question of the constitutionality of same-sex marriage nationwide. The high court, in a 1997 unrelated appeal, had expressed "grave doubts" about the ability of such private groups to challenge rulings that strike down ballot initiatives.

Walker's ruling had given the losing side a chance to appeal, and he held off allowing same-sex marriages from resuming until an emergency injunction request could be decided by the higher court.

Among the federal appeals judges who agreed Monday to block same-sex marriages from resuming immediately was Sidney Thomas, a Montana native who was interviewed this spring by President Obama for the Supreme Court vacancy that eventually went to Elena Kagan.

:mad:

MagicMarker

MagicMarker wrote: »

Harry Seaman

/snigger

The appeals court Monday set a fast schedule

Among the federal appeals judges who agreed Monday

I never understood the American habit of dropping the "on".
Is there an appeals court named "Monday"? Is "Monday" a form of agreement?!


But on topic, that's annoying. The poor people who had their marriages planned

Manic Moran

bluewolf wrote: »

I never understood the American habit of dropping the "on".
Is there an appeals court named "Monday"? Is "Monday" a form of agreement?!

On the other hand, are you sure that the use of 'on' is grammatically correct? After all, Monday has no physical embodiment, it is impossible for something to be off Monday or under Monday so why should something be 'on' Monday? Just because it's incredibly common doesn't mean it correct. How many people say 'Kirk beamed up to the USS Enterprise?' or 'I sailed on the Queen Mary 2 to New York?' The use of 'the' is incorrect unless used for emphasis, but most everyone does it.

But on topic, that's annoying. The poor people who had their marriages planned

In fairness, it's harly a surprise. Everyone knew this was going to go to the 9th Circuit, most people figure it'll hit the Supreme Court. The stay was all but inevitable.

NTM

Nodin

On again....off again....the whole gay marriage thing is turning into a celebrity engagement.....

Tar.Aldarion

It should be 'during Monday'.

BlaasForRafa

Manic Moran wrote: »

On the other hand, are you sure that the use of 'on' is grammatically correct? After all, Monday has no physical embodiment, it is impossible for something to be off Monday or under Monday so why should something be 'on' Monday? Just because it's incredibly common doesn't mean it correct. How many people say 'Kirk beamed up to the USS Enterprise?' or 'I sailed on the Queen Mary 2 to New York?' The use of 'the' is incorrect unless used for emphasis, but most everyone does it.

Its almost as annoying as when Americans drop the and from numbers as in "hunnerd ten" instead of "a hundred and ten", "two-thousand ten" instead of "two thousand and ten" etc.

Manic Moran

Maybe, but what's the grammatical difference between saying 'hundred ten' and 'twenty one'? or "One thousand one hundred" and "hundred ten"

As opposed to saying 'hundred and ten' and 'twenty and one' or "One thousand and one hundred"

NTM