More

Prop 8: Jerry Brown Urges Speedy Return To Gay Marriages

PAUL ELIAS and LISA LEFF   08/13/10 10:19 PM ET   AP

Jerry Brown Prop 8

SAN FRANCISCO — Attorney General Jerry Brown urged a federal appeals court Friday to waste no time in allowing gay marriages to resume in California now that a lower court has overturned the state's same-sex marriage ban.

The brief legal papers came in response to efforts by same-sex marriage opponents to get the 9th U.S. Court of Appeals to block a lower court judge's ruling striking down Proposition 8 from taking effect next week.

If the 9th Circuit refuses to intervene, it would clear the way for same-sex couples to marry starting after the close of business Wednesday.

Brown, the Democratic nominee for governor, said there was no reason for the appeals court to stay Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker's decision because the potential inconvenience to state and local agencies pale in comparison to the harm suffered by gay couples whose civil rights are being violated.

"While there is still the potential for limited administrative burdens should future marriages of same-sex couples be later declared invalid, these potential burdens are outweighed by the district court's conclusion, based on the overwhelming evidence, that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional," he said.

Theodore Olson and David Boies, the high-profile lawyers representing the two couples who successfully sued to get Proposition 8 invalidated, were scheduled to file a separate motion on the issue later Friday.

Protect Marriage, the coalition of religious and conservative groups that sponsored Proposition 8, has appealed Walker's Aug. 4 ruling that found the voter-approved law unconstitutional.

After Walker said on Thursday that he planned to finalize his ruling on Wednesday at 5 p.m., the group's lawyers also asked the 9th Circuit to prevent any gay marriages while the appeal is pending.

They argued the appeals court should grant an emergency stay "to avoid the confusion and irreparable injury that would flow from the creation of a class of purported same-sex marriages."

Depending on how the 9th Circuit rules, same-sex couples could begin tying the knot in California as early as next week or have to wait while the appeal works its way through the court and potentially the U.S. Supreme Court as well.

Walker, however, has expressed doubts over whether Protect Marriage has the right to challenge his ruling if neither the attorney general nor the governor elect to do so. Both officials refused to defend Proposition 8 in Walker's court and have since said they see no reason why gay couples should not be able to tie the knot now.

Although he allowed the group to intervene in the trial, the judge said the appellate court would have to make its own determination that same-sex marriage opponents would be injured if gay couples could wed, a claim Walker explicitly dismissed in his decision invalidating Proposition 8.

The ban's backers addressed the potential for such a roadblock in their emergency stay request, saying California's strong citizen initiative law permits ballot measure proponents to defend their interests if state officials will not.

"Proponents may directly assert the state's interest in defending the constitutionality of its laws, an interest that is indisputably sufficient to confer appellate standing," they said.

Theodore Boutrous, a lawyer with the legal team representing same-sex couples, said that keeping Protect Marriage from moving forward with an appeal was not necessarily the top priority of the plaintiffs.

"We believe that Chief Judge Walker's ruling last week on the merits provides a powerful record on appeal, and we want the appellate courts to address the merits of Proposition 8," Boutrous said. "The standing issue that Chief Judge Walker identified provides another potential weapon in our arsenal that will be part of the appellate arguments."

California voters passed Proposition 8 as a state constitutional amendment in November 2008, five months after the California Supreme Court legalized same-sex unions and an estimated 18,000 same-sex couples already had married.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST LOS ANGELES

SAN FRANCISCO — Attorney General Jerry Brown urged a federal appeals court Friday to waste no time in allowing gay marriages to resume in California now that a lower court has overturned the sta...
SAN FRANCISCO — Attorney General Jerry Brown urged a federal appeals court Friday to waste no time in allowing gay marriages to resume in California now that a lower court has overturned the sta...
Filed by Billy Silverman  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 355
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
  1 of 2  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
Cacey 10:23 AM on 08/14/2010
While many would consider Costa Rica to be a Third World Country, last week that nation's Supreme Court declared that a referendum scheduled for this December to decide if same sex marriages could be held was ordered not to take place. The reason was quite simple: citizens to not have the right to vote on the rights of others. Currently, it appears that Costa Rica is on track to join other American  Read More...
10:57 AM on 09/20/2010
What the heck is this place? An echo chamber full of homosickuals?
10:51 AM on 09/20/2010
jerry brown is one sick homosickual from san fransicko which we don't need around any position of public servant in the state of California. He only furthers his own agenda, lining his own pockets and the goals of sick homosexuals. This guy sodomized the people of the state of California last time he was governor ... we don't need a second raping.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hagagaga
My comments are funnier than yours.
03:02 AM on 09/03/2010
He's absolutely right...and I hope his official campaign song is California Uber Alles.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ioan Lightoller
Proud Married Gay Pagan Man
08:02 PM on 08/23/2010
Thank you, Mr Brown. As a former Californian, I applaud your asking that same-sex marriages be resumed as soon as possible. There is NO rational reason to keep loving couples from legally marrying. Hope you win in November. This Meg person would be a disaster for California.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Angie Tyne 1
I want my disagree button!!
03:40 PM on 08/16/2010
So if they will be harmed by these marriages going forward why aren't they using the existing marriages as evidence? Surely after a long two years they should be able to produce some evidence showing how all these SSMs have harmed OSMs? Anything? *crickets*
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lachihuahua
somewhere between land and sky
07:24 AM on 08/16/2010
Bravo Jerry! It is the right thing to do. Thank you for the sense of equity you have demonstrated for so many years. Hope you beat the pants off Meg. I cannot stomach the thought of her running our state. (nn)
07:36 PM on 08/16/2010
I know I'm voting for him! Princess Meg shouldn't be able to buy an election!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TallThinMan
06:45 PM on 08/15/2010
There's only ONE political candidate that believes in fairness for the INDIVIDUAL and not "group" "union" or any other money-sucking entity thats going to further bankrupt our state and that Candidate is CHELENE NIGHTINGALE
nightingaleforgovernor.com
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SteveSFM
politically incorrect left-winger
08:57 PM on 08/15/2010
Oh, look. The Southern Poverty Law Center wants us to know about her, too!

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2008/spring/the-nativists?page=0,14
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OBroadhurst
My politics do not meet guidelines.
01:19 AM on 08/16/2010
What she believes in, is hate.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SteveSFM
politically incorrect left-winger
04:48 AM on 08/15/2010
Yet one more reason to vote for Jerry instead of the violent billionaire.
06:54 PM on 08/14/2010
The weird thing about the proponant's 96 page brief is they keep going on and on and on about how important heterosexual marriage is for society and children....if you missed the first part of the argument, you'd think this was all a response to STRAIGHT MARRIAGE BEING BANNED.

I wish they could calm down and realize no one is plotting to take anything away from them.

There's enough "marriage" to go around for everyone.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PhilipB
10:07 PM on 08/14/2010
I have appreciated your comments before. I do not know why I have not fanned you. Fanned!
Yes, there is enough marriage to go around for everyone.
Best,
03:01 PM on 08/17/2010
Thanks! I am not here all the time.....sometimes arguing with the misguided religious right at imdb (of all places), and recently have been learning a lot HERE: http://prop8trialtracker.com/2010/08/17/the-similarities-and-differences-between-the-prop-8-and-doma-cases/#comments
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PhilipB
10:12 PM on 08/14/2010
Yes, there is enough marriage to go around!
Love that!
photo
Georgia1992
Proud Liberal Democrat
05:34 PM on 08/14/2010
I don't live N California (used to N the late 70s and I have family there), but I'm always interested what goes on in that state. I believe that all eyes and ears R paying close attention 2 the California elections. Whatever goes on N California and NY has an effect on every one N the USA. U have my blessing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Fogy
RIP, ignorance
11:47 AM on 08/16/2010
Guess you can't really call it NoCal, can you? :P
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jim281
Just slighty to the left of John Lennon
03:15 PM on 08/14/2010
This year, California is truly in a postion that draws national attention. Electioin Jerry Brown, Re-electing Barbara Boxer, and passing Prop 19 are hugely important to the whole country.

Here's the stats for registered CA voters:

"At the close of registration for the May 2009 special election, 17.2 million of the 23.4 million eligible voters in the state were registered to vote: 45% as Democrats, 31% as Republicans, 20% as independents, and 4% with other parties."

I BEG Californians - ESPECIALLY DEMOCRATS AND INDEPENDENTS, to SHOW UP AND VOTE!! Together, those two groups add up to 65% of the total voters.

YES YOU CAN!!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jobrien1950
fired up
05:25 PM on 08/14/2010
Meanwhile, Whitman is sinking another $13 million into her campaign (why, I don't know) which only goes to show her OCD run amok in her quest for the governorship. She could easily just go retire somewhere and keep all that cash. How high is the bill now? $112 million. She could have done a lot of decent things with that kind of money.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
JessWonderin
05:41 PM on 08/14/2010
With all her "pre-run" billions, she never set up ANY public, civic or charitiable legacy to leave behind . . . she will be noted for making a billion, never voting for 30 years and spending 150 MILLION on media buys for a job she is not qualified to do . . . .

Really ask yourself if THIS is the mentality of a desired "public official"???
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
KellyRyan
A micro-bio for one who has none.
06:53 PM on 08/14/2010
The luxury of self-indulgence is not viewed as heroic, wise, or conducive to the needs of Californians.

I look at Whitman, and the Mormons, Catholics, evangelicals that backed Prop 8 and wondered if the words, "humanity and empathy," are in their dictionary.
08:41 PM on 08/14/2010
I will show up to vote but it won't be for any Democrat.
See ya at the polls!
04:43 AM on 08/15/2010
Try not to vote on Party. Rather, vote who you think will do better.

Don't let the team decide for you. Use your own knowledge.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jim281
Just slighty to the left of John Lennon
12:36 PM on 08/15/2010
Glad to hear you will vote!

In a democracy, voting is not only a right; its a responsibility! I commend you on being responsible! (And WHO you vote for is your business!)

My hope is that most people will vote. If so, the results are delightfully predictable!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
aDelphinium
Occupy with heart
03:14 PM on 08/14/2010
Some clarification on the process, perhaps (as I've seen many questions re: what's going on)

http://prop8trialtracker.com/2010/08/14/late-night-prop-8-trial-news/
07:37 PM on 08/14/2010
THANKS ! ! !
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PhilipB
10:18 PM on 08/14/2010
Thanks!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jim281
Just slighty to the left of John Lennon
02:01 PM on 08/14/2010
I love it! It is almost amusing to me that the 9th circuit court of appeals may decline to intervene on the basis that the plaintiffs (Protect Marriage) are in no way harmed by Judge Walker's decision!

That has been the point ALL ALONG! If "Protect Marriage" has some religion-based delusion that marriage can only apply to hetero couples, then fine! Let THEM not marry a same-sex partner, but leave everybody else alone! It is patently unkind and unfair to trample the rights of others simply because their worldview differs from yours!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
IndependentMeans
Some people are wise, and some are otherwise.
02:04 PM on 08/14/2010
Agree. I am torn about this going to the SCOTUS as Scalia has in made it clear he regards religious beliefs to triumph civil rights. As in this one in the TX law.

DISSENT - JUSTICE SCALIA

One of the most revealing statements in today's opinion is the Court's grim warning that the criminalization of homosexual conduct is "an invitation to subject homosexual persons to discrimination both in the public and in the private spheres." Ante, at 14. It is clear from this that the Court has taken sides in the culture war, departing from its role of assuring, as neutral observer, that the democratic rules of engagement are observed. Many Americans do not want persons who openly engage in homosexual conduct as partners in their business, as scoutmasters for their children, as teachers in their children's schools, or as boarders in their home. They view this as protecting themselves and their families from a lifestyle that they believe to be immoral and destructive.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jim281
Just slighty to the left of John Lennon
02:16 PM on 08/14/2010
FANNED

Some justices, like Scalia and thomas, will continue to discriminate. but the others offer hope on this issue. Particularly impressive, to me, was Lawrence v. Texas, where in a 6-3 desicion, the Supremes founf Texas' sodomy law to be unconstitutional.

To me, it stands to reason that the same protections interpreted in the 14th ammendment as "the right to privacy", under the "liberty clause" in the "Due Process" section of the 14th, will ulitimately defend the rights of same-sex couples to have the same legal rights and pritections as hetero couples.

(BTW, that "Liberty Clause" has been interpreted by SCOTUS's for the last 100 years or so, to have very wide and far-reaching implications. It is the very same clause that was cited in the Roe v Wade, as well as Lawrence v Texas decisions.)

(So don't be fooled by the GOP's push to repeal the 14th simply because of its "Citizenship" clause. They are trying to destroy our rights and freedoms, by proposing the repeal of the 14th, with the EXCUSE of Citizenship, such as 'anchor babies and te rror babies. Their TRUE agenda is FAR more cynical!)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:53 PM on 08/14/2010
Thats Scalia speak for please don't let this come to my court on the 5th or 14th!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
KellyRyan
A micro-bio for one who has none.
06:56 PM on 08/14/2010
Incredible, isn't it. This same group, Protect Marriage, sought to keep the trial from being televised. They were concerned for their, "safety."

They were concerned, they would be revealed for who and what they are.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
aDelphinium
Occupy with heart
12:48 PM on 08/14/2010
"Take a look at the order from Judge Vaughn Walker, in which he truly eviscerates Prop 8 proponents' motion to stay his ruling:"

http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocServer/Perry_-_Order_on_Motion_to_Stay_081210.pdf
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
RainbowTeacher
01:52 PM on 08/14/2010
Thank you for this link - it was an excellent read! If you read this after reading the NOM blog, it just makes you laugh even harder at them. How can anyone read this masterful document and then even begin to believe what Maggie et al spew? I sat through the coverage of the entire trial and at no point did they offer up one shred of scholarly evidence to support their positions. Nor have they shown any evidence that same sex marriage will harm them in any other way than ending their careers when NOM is dismantled for being irrelevant.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
aDelphinium
Occupy with heart
12:44 PM on 08/14/2010
Prop 8 Lawyers “Smackdown” Judge Walker in Appellate Motion Posted by Maggie

from the "National Organization for Marriage"

http://nomblog.com/1586/
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
RainbowTeacher
01:28 PM on 08/14/2010
This has got to be one of the funniest blogs I have ever read! It sounds like a 5 year old screaming "because I said so! and Judge Walker is a booger face!"
I liked this line particularly: . In his ruling Walker pretended he never saw the deep scholarly evidence that opposite sex unions are different and children need mothers and fathers.

He didn't have to pretend - no such evidence was produced! That is the point - they had no case to present and they didn't really seem to try very hard. Which makes me question their motives in the first place.

And it, in fact, takes a slap at all single parents, regardless of gender, and basically goes back to the lame argument that marriage is only to produce children.

By the way- recent studies indicate that the offspring of lesbian parents do better than average in the rearing of successful, happy children. :-)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jim281
Just slighty to the left of John Lennon
02:30 PM on 08/14/2010
FANNED

LOL

The opponents of Due Process, and Equal Proetection (i.e. 'Protect Marriage') are in DENIAL! Whether they like it or not, or whether they "approve" or not, same-sex coupledom is a FACT OF LIFE! It will NEVER go away, and its embarrassing that some people keep on pushing to trample the rights of others! No matter how they try to present their case, no matter what there shallow arguments, it still amounts to one clear concept: DISCRIMINATION!

These (opponents to Equal Protection and due Process) are probably the same fools who rallied against medical mariajuana. How cruel! To me, if someone is suffering from a chronic and/or terminal condition, and hey even THINK mariajuama helps relieve their symptoms, GIVE IT TO THEM! Its ridiculous for these non-health-professionals to insist addiction to morphine is a better treatment than smoking a little weed.

They are obsessed with allowing ANYONE freedoms and rights to engage in behaviors that THEY don't agree with. Why can't they just "do their thing" and leave everyone else alone??
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
KellyRyan
A micro-bio for one who has none.
06:59 PM on 08/14/2010
Fanned and Favorited ... I'll hope this becomes part of the teaching curriculum. You can't be too young to learn the power of a secular Constitution and human rights.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
IndependentMeans
Some people are wise, and some are otherwise.
02:30 PM on 08/14/2010
Wow, that was quite a reach, and very inventive. ROFL.