Haters Got to Keep on Hating: Prop 8 Defenders Try to Kill Marriage Equality in California One More Time

Despite having been slapped down by the Republican-controlled U.S. Supreme Court, the hate groups and Republican activists behind Proposition 8, the state constitutional amendment that outlawed same-sex in California, have not given up. They announced last week that they will waste more of the taxpayers’ money with an appeal to the California Supreme Court to once again halt gay weddings in the state:

The California Supreme Court once again is delving into the heated battle over gay marriage as it considers a request filed Friday by the backers of Proposition 8 to stop same-sex weddings.

ProtectMarriage, the sponsors of the 2008 ballot measure, asked the state high court to stop the weddings immediately on the grounds that Gov. Jerry Brown lacked the authority to order county clerks to issue same-sex marriage licenses.

In a 50-page petition, ProtectMarriage contended that Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker’s 2010 federal injunction against Proposition 8 did not apply statewide.

The court, in an order signed by Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, asked Brown to respond Friday night to ProtectMarriage’s request for an immediate hold on the weddings while the justices consider the group’s arguments.

The order suggested the justices would rule quickly on the request for an immediate stop to the weddings but take several weeks to consider ProtectMarriage’s claims. The court gave the backers of the marriage ban until 9 a.m. Monday to address Brown’s arguments and set Aug. 1 as the deadline for further written arguments.

State Atty. Gen. Kamala D. Harris, representing Brown and other officials, told the court late Friday that stopping the marriages “could precipitate a conflict of constitutional dimension between this court and the federal court.”

The U.S. Constitution bars state courts from interfering with federal court orders, and halting the marriages now would create “uncertainty” about the validity of those already performed, Harris’ office argued.

ProtectMarriage’s petition to the court cited a state constitutional provision that prevents California officials from refusing to enforce a law without an appellate court ruling declaring it unconstitutional. There is no binding appellate decision that says the marriage ban was unconstitutional.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *