Get free daily email updates

Syndicate this site - RSS

Recent Posts

Blogger Menu

Click here to blog

Jon Fleischman

State Supremes Overturn Prop. 22

Minutes ago the California State Supreme Court released its decision on the gay marriage question (they were looking at the constitutionality of voter-passed Proposition 22, which placed into statute that marriage shall be between a man and a woman).

On a 4-3 decision, the Supremes OVERTURNED Proposition 22, striking the language from California law.

You can read their decision here.

You can be sure that the liberal Democrats who control the legislature will have a homesexual marriage bill on the Governor’s desk as quick they possibly can, which he apparently will sign.

The Governor released this one-sentence response to the court’s ruling:

“I respect the Court’s decision and as Governor, I will uphold its ruling.  Also, as I have said in the past, I will not support an amendment to the constitution that would overturn this state Supreme Court ruling.” 

Note that the Governor refrains from any subjective statements such as "I am disappointed by this ruling."  (Probably because he’s not.)

This will add some drama to this November’s vote on what I call the "Son of Proposition 22" — a Constitutional Amendment that will likely qualify via signature for the General Election ballot that would place the definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman into the State Constitution.

4 Responses to “State Supremes Overturn Prop. 22”

  1. Daniel@Rego.com Says:

    The battle over Gay Marriage is over in California. People will not take away what gay in California will be able to do.

    It will be anti-Gay marriage proponents who will have to argue that the civil right to marry someone of the same gender/sex should be taken away. The people will not do it. Support for Gay marriage has been increasing and only a pre-existing ban would have stopped it.

    Now watch the left argue for the sanctity of marriage and go out of the way to deny such a civil right to polygamous and incestuous couples/groups using all the arguments that the right used against gay marriage (and the left argued against).

    The people who wrote the Knight initiative as a statute instead of a constitutional amendment were fools.

  2. hoover@cts.com Says:

    Californians are quite willing to overturn decisions of the State Supreme Court.
    In the 1970’s liberals prematurely celebrated the end of capital punishment
    because of Federal and State supreme court rulings.

    Californians swiftly “overruled” the jurists with statewide measures in 1972
    and 1978 which restored the death penalty.

    The Field Poll measured public opinions on gay marriage in 2004 and 2006
    and found Opponents leading. Supporters were stuck on 43% in both those
    surveys, with Opponents at 53 and 50%.

    I believe these numbers understate the actual Opposition of voters.

    Mr. Field’s surveys in late 1999 and early 2000 showed Prop. 22 passing by
    margins of just 50% to 41% (Dec. 1999), and 53% to 40% (Feb. 2000)

    On election day in March 2000, however, Pete Knight’s Propositon 22 won a
    LANDSLIDE majority, with 61% voting to define marriage as the union of one
    man and one woman. 52 of 58 counties voted YES, including Los Angeles
    county (59%):

    ………………..YES on Prop. 22 4,618,673 [61.3%]
    ………………..NO on Prop. 22 2,909,370 [38.7%]

    California Families’ motto now should be, “We did it before, We’ll do it again!”

  3. Daniel@Rego.com Says:

    In 2000, Knight Initiative supporters were trying to keep the legal definition of marriage.

    In 2008, DOMA supporters are trying to CHANGE the definition, and in a way that will take away a legal right that some people now have.

    Enough people will refuse to take away a legally held right (regardless of how it was imposed) if they don’t believe that the enjoyment of marriage by individuals of the same gender/sex directly hurts them — even though in the past they were not willing to grant those rights.

    Before, nothing was being taken away or lost. Now it will be. The old arguments will not work.

    Can we successfully argue that we should explicitly limit marriage based on gender/sex?

    If the initiative fails in November, then the issue becomes moot.

  4. hoover@cts.com Says:

    California’s Death Penalty law was set aside twice in the 1970’s by the
    Courts, so backers of capital punishment had to “take away” a Court-
    awarded victory. (Jim Lacy can probably provide some insight here).

    I believe the subsequent voter initiatives were Prop. 17 in 1972, and Prop. 7
    in 1978. Both won landslide victories and restored the death penalty for 1st-
    degree murder, in part by modifying the law to meet the US Supreme Court
    guidelines

    Many voters will be OUTRAGED that 4 misguided justices today arrograntly
    voided the ballots of the 4,618,673 Californians who passed Proposition 22.

    The Marriage Initiative in November is very winnable. And the anger already
    being heard on Talk Radio today will help win that victory.