It's Confirmed, We Know What Really Scares the Dems in 2026
NC's Roy Cooper Is Hoping This Lawsuit Gets Quashed
Trump Was Right: NJ Gov. Mikie Sherrill Forced to Eat Crow Over Massive...
Justice Jackson Had to Cut Short an Event in Alaska Last Week. We...
Cities Are Giving Up on Flock Safety Cameras
Female Tennis Players Will No Longer Have to Worry About Men Invading Their...
NBC News Blames Idaho Laws for Death of Trans Teen
James Talarico Laments That Texas Didn't Pass the George Floyd Act
A Democrat Just Admitted President Trump Was Right About the Border
This Is Why I Oppose 'Trans Women' in My Bathroom
The DSA Says You Don't Have a Constitutional Right to Double-Digit Returns
Here's What a $465,000 Government Plumber Reveals About the How the Left Views...
Trump Reveals 'We've Been Nice' to Iran – Leaving Door Open for Heightened...
The Smithsonian National Museum of American History Had a Disastrous Hearing on the...
Philly DA Larry Krasner Accused of Threatening Prosecutors to Bury Conflict of Interest
OPINION

Fed. court punts Prop 8 case to Calif. court

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Fed. court punts Prop 8 case to Calif. court
SAN FRANCISCO (BP)--The federal appeals court considering the high-profile Prop 8 case submitted a technical legal question to the California Supreme Court Jan. 4 in a move that could have a major impact on the future of "gay marriage" in the United States.
Advertisement

At issue is whether ProtectMarriage.com -- the group that sponsored Prop 8 -- has what is called "legal standing" to defend Prop 8 in federal court. If it doesn't, then the case would be dismissed and the court would have to determine whether the lower court ruling that reversed Prop 8 was legitimate. But if ProtectMarriage.com is found to have legal standing, then the case can go forward and the appeals court will rule on the larger issue of "gay marriage" legalization.

The question of legal standing became a legitimate one when former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and then-California Attorney General Jerry Brown -- who have the duty under state law to defend laws -- chose not to defend Prop 8 in court. ProtectMarriage.com became the primary defendant.

Passed by voters in 2008, Prop 8 amended the state constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman. If the ruling overturning it is upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court -- which is not yet involved -- then "gay marriage" likely would be legalized in all 50 states.

In its Jan. 4 order, a three-judge panel for the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals asked the California Supreme Court to decide whether under the state constitution or state law the "official proponents of an initiative measure" can defend the measure "when the public officials charged with that duty refuse to do so." The panel heard oral arguments in the case in December.

Advertisement

"Because we cannot consider this important constitutional question unless the appellants before us have standing to raise it ... it is critical that we be advised of the rights under California law of the official proponents of an initiative measure ...," the Ninth Circuit order read.

The panel said it was unaware of any "controlling state precedent on this precise question."

The panel stayed the case until the California Supreme Court submitted its answer.

Groups that support Prop 8 expressed frustration at the prospect they might lack legal standing but confidence their side would prevail.

"Politicians should not be able to nullify a democratic act of the people by refusing their duty to defend it," Alliance Defense Fund attorney Jim Campbell said. ADF has helped defend Prop 8. "The people of California have the right to be defended, and thus the official proponents of Proposition 8 must have standing to defend that law. Otherwise, the governor and attorney general will succeed in indirectly invalidating a measure that they had no power to strike down directly. With this recent development, the Alliance Defense Fund and the rest of the Protectmarriage.com legal team remain confident that the right of the people of California to protect marriage in their constitution will ultimately be honored."

Advertisement

In a separate ruling Jan 4, the Ninth Circuit panel denied legal standing to Imperial County, which had sought to intervene in defense of Prop 8. Prop 8 backers had hoped the court would side with the county.

Supporters of the traditional definition of marriage warn that "gay marriage" legalization will negatively affect all of society, impacting everything from the tax-exempt status of religious organizations, to the way private businesses are operatedm to what is taught in elementary schools.

Michael Foust is an assistant editor of Baptist Press.

Copyright (c) 2011 Southern Baptist Convention, Baptist Press www.BPNews.net

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement