Prop. 8 Opponents To Tell Judge Lawsuit Is Irrational

[Pint0 Xtreme]

LINK

Prop. 8 Opponents To Tell Judge Lawsuit Is Irrational

SAN FRANCISCO -- Two couples who challenged California's ban on same-sex marriage have told a federal judge in San Francisco that they plan to prove at a January trial that the measure is "irrational, indefensible and unconstitutional."
U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker is scheduled to hold a nonjury trial beginning Jan. 11 on the lawsuit, filed by a lesbian couple from Berkeley and a gay couple from Burbank to challenge the ban enacted by state voters last year.
In a trial brief filed late Monday, the couples' lawyers said they hope to prove that Proposition 8 supporters "fail to demonstrate even a single legitimate interest that it even rationally serves."
Proposition 8 supporters in an opposing trial brief claimed there are numerous reasons for a traditional definition of marriage.
One of the reasons, their lawyers wrote, is "promoting and regulating naturally procreative relationships between men and women to provide for the nurture and upbringing of the next generation."
The Proposition 8 supporters also denied opponents' claim that the ballot measure was motivated by bias against gays and lesbians.
Both sides also filed witness lists late Monday and said they plan to call a number of professors to the stand to prove their points.
Both said they will question the two couples who filed the lawsuit, Kristin Perry and Sandra Stier, of Berkeley, and Paul Katami and Jeffrey Zarillo, of Burbank.
The two couples said they also plan to call the five official proponents of Proposition 8 to the stand to testify about strategy of the successful campaign for passage of the measure.
Walker is scheduled to conduct a pretrial conference on the case on Dec. 16.

[General Zod]

It'd be nice to see something come of it but I'm almost expecting it to get buried in years of appeals if they even do manage to get a ruling in their favor.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

It'd be nice to see something come of it but I'm almost expecting it to get buried in years of appeals if they even do manage to get a ruling in their favor.

Oh, it most definitely will get buried in years of appeals until it reaches SCOTUS. Hopefully, we would have eliminated Prop 8 through the ballot by then.

[CmdrWilkens]

It'd be nice to see something come of it but I'm almost expecting it to get buried in years of appeals if they even do manage to get a ruling in their favor.

Oh, it most definitely will get buried in years of appeals until it reaches SCOTUS. Hopefully, we would have eliminated Prop 8 through the ballot by then.

It CAN'T reach the SCOTUS. Because its a matter of state constitutional law unless there is a matter which involves Federal Law or the US Constitution there is no jurisdiction for the SCOTUS.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

It CAN'T reach the SCOTUS. Because its a matter of state constitutional law unless there is a matter which involves Federal Law or the US Constitution there is no jurisdiction for the SCOTUS.

No, Prop 8's FEDERAL constitutionality is at question here. The California Supreme Court already upheld its state constitutionality in May.

[CmdrWilkens]

It CAN'T reach the SCOTUS. Because its a matter of state constitutional law unless there is a matter which involves Federal Law or the US Constitution there is no jurisdiction for the SCOTUS.

No, Prop 8's FEDERAL constitutionality is at question here. The California Supreme Court already upheld its state constitutionality in May.

Well fuck that's just stupid.

[Terralthra]

It CAN'T reach the SCOTUS. Because its a matter of state constitutional law unless there is a matter which involves Federal Law or the US Constitution there is no jurisdiction for the SCOTUS.

No, Prop 8's FEDERAL constitutionality is at question here. The California Supreme Court already upheld its state constitutionality in May.

Well fuck that's just stupid.

The sequence of events goes: banning gay marriage via ballot initiative succeeds. State Supreme Court finds that the ballot measure violates the state constitution's equal protection clauses and overturns it, making gay marriage legal. The same interests get Prop. 8 on the ballot, which is basically another gay marriage ban, but as a constitutional amendment this time (meaning the SSC's judgment is moot). Gay couples sue the State of California, alleging that the (now-amended) State Constitution violates the US Constitution (equal protection clause).

[The Yosemite Bear]

remember california, where it takes 50% of the voters to disenfranchise 10%-15% of the state's population, but 67% to pass a budget.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

If anyone is interested, here is the court brief (PDF).