« Gay soldiers in U.S., Brazil under fire | Main | Strategy Question: What leverage do we have? »
June 23, 2008
Interesting gay marriage bedfellows
Posted by: Chris
Remember the clever theory advanced by Log Cabin blogger Kevin Norte about how the ballot measure to ban gay marriage in California was actually "revising" rather than "amending" the state's constitution?
Well it's now officially a legal claim:
In a legal brief filed late Friday with the high court, the gay rights groups argue that the initiative is a "revision" of the state Constitution, which would require involvement of the Legislature, rather than simply an amendment, which can be approved by a majority vote in an election. …
The suit has been brought by Lambda Legal, the National Center for Lesbian Rights, the ACLU and other gay and civil rights groups -- interesting bedfellows for our gay Republican friends. I offered my own view (here and here) about why the claim being advanced here is unlikely to prevail on the merits, but the L.A. Times report makes it sound as if it won't even get that far:
Legal experts said the supporters of same-sex marriage face a difficult task in getting the justices to block a vote on the initiative. Typically, courts allow initiatives to proceed to a vote and then consider constitutional arguments on them if they pass. The court indicated it would rule on the petition this summer.
All that said, the argument is an interesting one and the legal issues are very much open to interpretation. In a kitchen-sink battle like the one over gay marriage in California, you can see why they're throwing any and everything to see what sticks.
That said, and here I go again with hating on LCR, it is surprising to see gay Republicans associated with an effort to prevent the voters from deciding the question. Generally the "unelected judges" are the bad guys, right?
(Photo of gay newlyweds via Los Angeles Times)
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834527dd469e200e553860f5d8834
Comments
-
LOL for all your bitching it's not like HRC, or the democrats are going to step up and do anything to defend us. It took a republican governor, and a Reagan appointed judge to get us this far!
Don't spit in a friendly eye!
-
Actually, it's the Republican governor's fault that we're in this fix. Instead of letting the legislature's twice-passed bill go on, he vetoed it, saying that the courts should rule on it.
Clever guy, though. Not vetoing the bills would've been political suicide for him within the Republican party. We all know Arnold is quite the ambitious man. Instead he passed the hot potato onto the judges, displacing potential wrath onto their now perceived "activist" image.
-
I'll say it again --- deciding a civil liberties measure by majority vote is Constitutional genocide - no matter how you slice it or dice it. Our judicial systems - state and federal - have utterly defaulted on this issue; instead deferring to politicians who cravenly pander to the majority.
For that Arnold Schwarzenegger, deserves an especially hot spot in Hell. As a creature of Hollywood, he knows full-well the humanity of the gay population and its contribution to our civilization. Instead, he capitulates to his fucking political party and throws us under the bus. Fuck you Arnold.
-
I'll say it again --- deciding a civil liberties measure by majority vote is Constitutional genocide - no matter how you slice it or dice it. Our judicial systems - state and federal - have utterly defaulted on this issue; instead deferring to politicians who cravenly pander to the majority.
For that Arnold Schwarzenegger, deserves an especially hot spot in Hell. As a creature of Hollywood, he knows full-well the humanity of the gay population and its contribution to our civilization. Instead, he capitulates to his fucking political party and throws us under the bus. Fuck you Arnold.
-
Hawyer and Lucrece,
A couple of things here ...
Actually, it's the Republican governor's fault that we're in this fix. Instead of letting the legislature's twice-passed bill go on, he vetoed it, saying that the courts should rule on it.
Well, I'm not a 100% sure about this, but my understanding of California law is that legislature cannot "overrule" citizen initiatives. In other words, the legislature did not have the legal authority to pass a gay-marriage bill because California voters approved the Proposition 22 in 2000, which essentially forbade same-sex marriages. Even if the Governor had signed the marriage bills, they arguably would have been without force or effect (similar to San Francisco's same-sex marriages in 2004).
The fact that California permits voter sponsored initiatives is lamentable, to put it mildly. As a California resident, I can tell you that ignorant and prejudiced voters have used the citizen initiative process to target gay folks (Prop. 22; Briggs Initiative) and immigrants (Prop 187) for unfair treatment. And, as I said, the worst part is that the legislature is powerless to overturn these initiative laws. This process needs to be changed.
Instead, he capitulates to his fucking political party and throws us under the bus. Fuck you Arnold.
There is no doubt that Governor Schwarzenegger played "hot potato" with the same-sex marriage issue, passing it off to the Supreme Court so that he could avoid any responsibility for it.
However, the "fuck you" is over the top. Governor Schwarzenegger has signed scores of pro-gay legislation into law and has been one of the most gay progressive governors we've ever had. Thing is, those laws are low-profile and you wouldn't know about them if you weren't a Californa resident. No question he has waffled on the marriage issue, but he has an outstanding record on just about every other LGBT issue.
The comments to this entry are closed.
Kevin on Jun 23, 2008 2:01:28 PM:
Decent, team-playing gay Republicans just can't win with you, you militant homosexual you.
xo