Supreme Courts rules in favor of opposite sex 'marriage' defendants

Posted on 11 Jan 2010 at 3:16pm
U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker
U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker

The Supreme Court ruled on the side of the defenders of Proposition 8 that proceedings today in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals could not be broadcast. The ruling was a stay until Wednesday.

U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker had ruled last week that the trial could be streamed on YouTube at the end of the day. Defendants in the case argued that they would suffer irreparable harm from broadcast.

The only dissent was from Justice Stephen Breyer, who is from San Francisco. He said that he did not think the court’s standard for granting a stay had been met or that, from the papers filed, they would suffer ‘irreparable harm.’

This is the second time the Supreme Court intervened on the side of opposite sex “marriage” proponents. In October, they ruled that the 138,000 names of persons who signed petitions to overturn Washington state’s law equal benefits law could not be released. Washington law says that the names of people signing petitions are public record. Washington voters upheld the equality law in November.

These rulings may give an indication of how the Supreme court would rule if the Prop 8 case reaches them. But aren’t court proceedings open to the public and shouldn’t the public have access to those trials when there is wide interest in them? Isn’t the Supreme Court just allowing the bigots to wear their KKK hoods to court?

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments