While we were away: Brown forced to waste more time on should-be no-brainer
On 6/11, California Attorney General Jerry Brown pushed for Prop 8 to remain in effect while the case makes its way through federal court:
In written arguments filed late Thursday, Brown said permitting gays to marry before appeals in the case are completed “would not serve the public interest because it would create significant uncertainty for many persons [involved in] a relationship in which certainty is of the utmost importance.”
Brown: Keep Prop. 8 in force until final resolution of federal challenge [LA Times]
But don't you dare think he's gone all NOM on us. The very next day, he again voiced his disdain for California's most prominent constitutional blight:
Brown...said that even though California is required to enforce Proposition 8, he is free to agree with the challengers that it violates the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Brown's position, laid out in a brief filed late Friday, puts the state's highest-ranking law enforcement officer on the record declaring that the ballot measure violates federal constitutional protections. The San Francisco case may eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court.
Jerry Brown again says Prop. 8 should be struck down [LA Times]
Now if only we lived in a world where a high-ranking legal scholar's stance on a thoroughly civil matter was not, in the eyes of so many, easily invalidated by the personal, religious-based discomfort of every random 'mo foey Joe and Jane who've chosen to put their own interpretations of Leviticus above accurate interpretations of equal protection.
[::sigh::] A married, fairness-loving, civilly-minded boy can dream, can't he?
(Still want pics...even one) But re our Gov. Moonbeam and his statements, things are 'ripening' re the Prop H8 front. More legal minds have helped the rest of us realize that this (Olson/Boies case) is a full attack via the Fourteenth Amendment, to the Equal Protetion, ?Fairness clauses thereof.
But, with the construction of the current federal court system, what is expected is that it will either win or fail at the district level, be appealed to the 9th Circuit Court by whichever side loses and there Prop H8 will be struck down. Also, they feel it will not be accepted by SCOTUS on appeal, so that ruling will only affect the 9th (Western Circuit) and almost specifically only California, because only here has it already been decided that marriage equality is a fundamental right.
..... and to top it off all of this will take a minimum of two years.
So in a way Jerry is right, a local injunction to allow marriages with all the appeals that would engender would only cause a mess.
On your end of the country the GLAD Gill vs. ? case in MASS is the one people hope to use to overturn DOMA. That will at least let those of you who are married derive the Federal benefits of marriage.
Posted by: LOrion | Jun 28, 2009 11:35:49 AM
Pics are coming. We have hundreds upon hundreds of them (and none yet from our professional photog). So I need to breathe a little and then sort through them all before I even think to post them.
Posted by: G-A-Y | Jun 28, 2009 11:38:03 AMcomments powered by Disqus