An Assault Weapons Ban Is Heading to Spanberger's Desk. Here's What to Expect.
Watch Scott Jennings Obliterate the Dems' Arguments for Shutting Down DHS on CNN...
Did You See This Clip of the NYC IED Attack? You Cannot...
What Answer Was This Dem Supposed to Give When Asked This Question?
Tucker Carlson Claims US Troops Will Rape Iranian Women. Ted Cruz Levels Him.
Here Are the Radical Leftist Judges Who Said Trump Cannot End TPS for...
Bernie Moreno Pushes Congress to Put American Homebuyers First
Did You Catch This Now-Deleted Post From CNN About the Alleged ISIS-Inspired NYC...
Yamaha Says Sayonara to California
Seventh U.S. Service Member Killed in Iran Strikes Honored at Dover Air Force...
Look Who Zohran Mamdani Just Invited to Dinner
President Trump Pledged to Stop Iran From Obtaining Nuclear Weapons in 2015. Now...
Secretary of War: Today Will Be Our Most Intense Day of Strikes in...
Scott Jennings Shuts Down CNN Panel Over Alleged Iranian Elementary School Strike
Rep. Andy Barr Hit With Brutal Attack Ad Over His Past Statements on...
OPINION

Calif. court considers Prop 8 legal question

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Calif. court considers Prop 8 legal question
SAN FRANCISCO (BP)--California's Supreme Court appeared poised Tuesday to side with supporters of traditional marriage in a critical case that will help determine whether Proposition 8 is constitutional.
Advertisement

At issue during oral arguments was not the issue of "gay marriage" itself, but instead the question of whether ProtectMarriage.com -- the group that sponsored Prop 8 -- has what is called legal standing and can, under state law, defend the constitutional amendment in federal court.

The issue came to the forefront when former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former Attorney General Jerry Brown (who is now governor) chose not to defend Prop 8 in court.

If the California court rules that ProtectMarriage.com has legal standing, then the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals -- which asked the California court to consider the legal standing issue -- will rule on Prop 8 and the definition of marriage. Opponents of Prop 8 argue that ProtectMarriage.com does not have legal standing and that it has no right to appeal last year's lower court ruling striking down Prop 8.

Passed in 2008, Prop 8 defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

During oral arguments, a majority of justices appeared skeptical to the argument that ProtectMarriage.com does not have legal standing. If it lacked it, some of them suggested, the governor and attorney general in essence would have the power to veto a citizen-approved initiative -- simply by not defending it in court.

Advertisement

Justice Joyce Kennard said if the court ruled against ProtectMarriage.com it "would nullify the great power pertaining to proposing and adopting state constitutional amendments."

Andy Pugno, an attorney with ProtectMarriage.com, said in an email to supporters that oral arguments went "fantastic."

"The justices seemed baffled by our opponents' extreme position," Pugno wrote. "According to them, our opponents should be entitled to challenge a voter-passed measure and, upon convincing the State's Attorney General not to oppose the lawsuit, exclude the measure's official proponents from the courtroom -- such that the majority of voters go completely unrepresented. As one justice said, 'that just defies common sense.'"

A written ruling is expected within 90 days.

Compiled by Michael Foust, associate 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