RECENT  POSTS:  » No, you really don't seem to know what tyranny is, Jerry Cox » Vatican's #Humanum event meant to paint gay families as 'evil' and 'obscene,' admits invited guest » Read: Federal judge calls MS's marriage ban what it is: discriminatory » Yet another federal judge accurately notes crude discrimination within Arkansas' marriage ban » Prominent conservative outlet equates LGBT activists with Nazi paramilitary » New pledge: Conservative pastors choose to separate selves from civil marriage » Read: ADF creates fake 'victim' superbook; misapplies business matters to churches » P&G reaches out to pro-discrimination activist, learns it made right choice » In prep for Pope's 2015 visit, World Meeting of Families readies gay stigma, exclusion » Today in ambition: NOM cofounder vows to fight marriage equality for 100 years  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

08/04/2010

EEK! The #prop8 decision is here

by Jeremy Hooper

Perry et al v. Schwarzenegger et al
Prop 8 Ruling FINAL

**UPDATE: This is awesome:

REMEDIES

Plaintiffs have demonstrated by overwhelming evidence that Proposition 8 violates their due process and equal protection rights and that they will continue to suffer these constitutional violations until state officials cease enforcement of Proposition 8. California is able to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, as it has already issued 18,000 marriage licenses to same-sex couples and has not suffered any demonstrated harm as a result,see FF 64-66; moreover, California officials have chosen not to defend Proposition 8 in these proceedings.

Because Proposition 8 is unconstitutional under both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses, the court orders entry of judgment permanently enjoining its enforcement; prohibiting the official defendants from applying or enforcing Proposition 8 and directing the official defendants that all persons under their control or supervision shall not apply or enforce Proposition 8. The clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment without bond in favor of plaintiffs and plaintiff-intervenors and against defendants and defendant-intervenors pursuant to FRCP 58.

IT IS SO ORDERED."

CELEBRATE! Then commit to helping defend this fantastic decision!

***

**And remember: Judge Walker was a (H.W.) Bush appointee!

***

**UPDATE: From best we can tell, Judge Walker did not stay the ruling. So does this mean same-sex couples are legally able to marry ASAP?!?! Anyone know what's going on?

***SCRATCH THAT: Walker just issued a stay. Attorneys must respond by August 6 (Friday).

***

*NOTE: Major hat tip to New York Magazine's Chris Rovzar, who had this before ANYONE, just in an unconfirmed form.

6A00D8341C503453Ef014E88E5D8A5970D-161

*UPDATE: Phase two, 2/7/12: READ: The Ninth Circuit's Prop 8 Opinion [G-A-Y]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails