Site Meter

Posts Tagged “California Proposition 8”

california supremes

Shannon Minter, standing, speaks to the California Supreme Court in San Francisco, Thursday, March 5, 2009 on the constitutionality of the state’s voter-approved Proposition 8 that bans gay unions. The court will decide whether to uphold the same-sex marriage ban and whether same-sex couple marriages will remain valid

The 90 day deadline for the California Supreme Court to issue its judgement on California Proposition 8 which restored traditional marriage (one man and one woman) is fast approaching. Oral arguments were heard March 5, 2009 which means the decision is coming imminently.

The court usually gives a one business day notice before releasing its opinions on Mondays or Thursdays. So, we could learn tomorrow.

It is surprising there have been NO leaks of a decision which has taken many weeks to draft.

Perhaps this is a clue, however.

Equality California, a leading gay rights group, is surveying its members to gauge whether they support putting gay marriage on a 2010 state ballot or waiting until 2012.

While the state waits for the California Supreme Court’s verdict on Proposition 8 – which bans gay marriage – the group asks that members answer the survey by 5 p.m. on Wednesday.

“We stand together, hopeful that the California Supreme Court will confirm that fundamental civil rights cannot be stripped away from a minority group at the ballot box. However, we must be prepared to go back to the ballot if the Supreme Court fails to overturn Proposition 8,” says an email message from Marc Solomon, the group’s marriage director.

Stay tuned……

Technorati Tags: ,

Tags: ,

Comments 4 Comments »

gay marriage march 5

Kate Kuykendall (R) and her wife Tori Kuykendall (L) stand with their daughter during a gay rights rally against the Proposition 8 measure at the El Pueblo de Los Angeles park, March 5, 2009.

The latest California Field Poll shows it continues to be a difficult issue for California registered voters.

California voters are as sharply divided over gay marriage as they were in November when they approved Proposition 8, overturning a state Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriages.

Voters passed Proposition 8, which declared marriage could only be between a man and a woman, 52 percent to 48 percent.

A new Field Poll showed voters almost evenly split, 48 percent to 47 percent, when asked if they would approve a new constitutional amendment to again allow same-sex couples to marry.

Last week, the state Supreme Court heard arguments in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8. From questions asked by the seven justices, court watchers concluded the court is likely to uphold Proposition 8 but also allow to stand the 18,000 same-sex marriages performed after the court’s original ruling in May and the November election.

A coalition of gay-rights groups have filed an initiative aimed at the 2010 ballot to make same-sex marriages legal again.

Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo said that while Californians are dramatically more supportive of same-sex marriages than they were a few decades ago, he questioned whether attitudes would be much different in 2010 than they were in 2008.

He noted that gubernatorial elections always have smaller voter turnouts than presidential elections and that younger voters most supportive of same-sex marriage are also among the least reliable voters.

“If you bring this to an election, turnout really does matter,” DiCamillo said. “Which groups turn out a little bit more and which ones turn out a little bit less have a big effect on the outcome.”

A second difficulty, the pollster said, is that an amendment reinstating same-sex marriage would require a “yes” vote whereas Proposition 8 required a “no” vote to preserve gay marriages.
“The thing that works against the advocates’ position is now they’ve got to get a ‘yes’ vote which is harder to get than a ‘no’ vote,” DiCamillo said.

It is likely that the California Supreme Court will PUNT on the issue of gay marriage in the coming weeks. By PUNT, Flap means that the court will uphold California Proposition 8 restoring the traditional definition of marriage – while on the other hand allowing the same sex marriages already completed to remain valid.

What will this mean for gay politics in 2010 – a Governor’s election year?

Dan Walters has an accurate description of the conventional wisdom on a California electoral outcome.

It will be a gamble for gay marriage proponents to come before California voters again in 2010.

Will homosexual activists roll the dice?

Technorati Tags: ,

Tags: ,

Comments 2 Comments »

california supremes

Shannon Minter, standing, speaks to the California Supreme Court in San Francisco, Thursday, March 5, 2009 on the constitutionality of the state’s voter-approved Proposition 8 that bans gay unions. The court will decide whether to uphold the same-sex marriage ban and whether same-sex couple marriages will remain valid

Flap watched the oral arguments before the California Supreme Court on the challenge to California Proposition 8 which was approved by California voters last November. Proposition 8 restored the traditional definition of marriage (one man and one woman) in the California Constitution.

It is my sense (and others too) that the California Supremes will acquiese to the vote of the people on making traditional marriage (one man and one woman) the law of California since the election. However, the validity of prevous gay marriages (allowed by last year’s California Supreme Court ruling on Proposition 22) may be upheld in some way.

The California Supreme Court appeared ready today to vote to uphold Proposition 8, the November ballot measure that banned gay marriage, but also seemed ready to decide unanimously to recognize existing same-sex marriages.

During a three-hour televised hearing in San Francisco, only two of the court’s seven justices indicated a possible readiness to overturn the initiative. Chief Justice Ronald M. George noted that the court was following a different Constitution when it approved gay marriage last May.

“Today we have a different state Constitution,” he said.

Justice Joyce L. Kennard, who usually votes in favor of gay rights, voted against accepting the revision challenge to Proposition 8 but said she would hear arguments over the validity of existing same-sex marriages.

Kennard said during the hearing that “Prop. 8 did not take away the whole bundle of rights that this court articulated in the marriage case.”

She said that “a very important holding” – giving sexual orientation the same constitutional status as race or gender – was not changed.
“Is it still your view that the sky has fallen and gays and lesbians are left with nothing?” she asked gay rights lawyers?

Kennard told them they also had the right to return to voters with their own initiative.

So, how will the vote break down in the court?

Gay Marriage

Justices supporting the overturn of the original gay marriage ban (May 2008) are:

  • Chief Justice Ronald George
  • Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar
  • Justice Joyce L. Kennard
  • Justice Carlos R. Moreno

Chief Justice George and Justice Moreno stand for reconfirmation to another twelve year term of office in November 2010.

Justices dissenting from the original decision to end the gay marriage ban are:

  • Justice Marvin Baxter
  • Justice Carol Corrigan
  • Justice Ming Chin

Flap will stay with his previous opinion:

Flap can count as well.  Three California Supreme Court Justices that opposed gay marriage plus Justice Kennard (who refused to sign the order and voted to deny the petitions) equals four votes upholding the Proposition and the traditional definition of marriage.

Flap bets the final vote will be 6-1 with Moreno dissenting to uphold Proposition 8 simply because a MORON would have to rule this is a revision of the Constitution and not an amendment.

The decision by the California supreme court is due within 90 days. Want to bet the Court releases its opinion on Friday prior to the Memorial Day weekend?

Technorati Tags: , ,

Tags: , ,

Comments 7 Comments »

prop 8 rally

Wesley Gann (R) and his partner Jerry Johnson take part in a rally ahead of the California Supreme Court hearing on Proposition 8 in Los Angeles March 4, 2009. Proposition 8, passed by California voters in November, amends the state constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is recognized in California

Yes, the California Supreme Court will hear oral arguments for and against California Proposition 8 that was passed by California voters last November. Proposition 8 restored the traditional definition of marriage in the California Constitution – one man and one woman.

All of the legal filings before the California Supreme Court are here.

The proceedings before the Court will be covered live by Flap on Twitter beginning a little before 9 AM Pacific time. Follow Flap on Twitter here or read the right sidebar ————->

Technorati Tags: , ,

Tags: , ,

Comments 4 Comments »

prop-8-maps-to which matshes up Google Maps and Proposition 8 Donors

The New York Times today (Via Michelle Malkin) FINALLY realizes there might be a problem with gay marriage proponent’s intimidation of Proposition 8 (the California Constitutional Amendment which restored the traditional definition of marriage – one man and one woman) donors.
FOR the backers of Proposition 8, the state ballot measure to stop single-sex couples from marrying in California, victory has been soured by the ugly specter of intimidation.

Some donors to groups supporting the measure have received death threats and envelopes containing a powdery white substance, and their businesses have been boycotted.

The targets of this harassment blame a controversial and provocative Web site,

The site takes the names and ZIP codes of people who donated to the ballot measure — information that California collects and makes public under state campaign finance disclosure laws — and overlays the data on a Google map.

Visitors can see markers indicating a contributor’s name, approximate location, amount donated and, if the donor listed it, employer. That is often enough information for interested parties to find the rest — like an e-mail or home address. The identity of the site’s creators, meanwhile, is unknown; they have maintained their anonymity. is the latest, most striking example of how information collected through disclosure laws intended to increase the transparency of the political process, magnified by the powerful lens of the Web, may be undermining the same democratic values that the regulations were to promote.

Will such internet activity chill free speech and discourge voters from either donating to political causes/campaigns or donating their time/resources (which is reportable if worth more than $100)?

The California and federal courts will eventually decide the proper balance between campaign disclosure laws and the chilling of political activity/speech.

In the meantime, donors to Proposition 8 will endure public ridicule/scorn and ugly repercussions from the radical homosexual pro-gay marriage cabal as they gear up for another election in 2010 to overturn Proposition 8.

Technorati Tags: ,

Tags: ,

Comments 2 Comments »

©Gregory Flap Cole All Rights Reserved