Appellate court punts Prop 8 case over to CA Sup Ct

Basically, the federal appellate court said that it can’t decide the case until the CA Supreme Court decides if the bad guys even have standing to appeal. TakePart does a good job explaining it:

In August, Judge Vaughn Walker of the U.S. District Court in San Francisco ruled that California’s gay marriage ban — Prop 8 — violated the U.S. Constitution. Neither Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who was the named defendant in the case, nor Attorney General Jerry Brown, decided to appeal the decision. The only people who were unhappy with the judge’s ruling were the private groups who supported Prop 8 during the election. So they asked the appellate court in San Francisco to take up the case.

Except, anyone who brings an appeal needs to demonstrate what’s called “standing” or the legal right to initiate a lawsuit based on that party’s interest in the case. Since the proponents of Prop 8 weren’t actually the defendants in the case (since they are private parties, and not the government officials charged with enforcing the gay marriage ban), the federal appeals panel said it was unclear under state law whether they had standing to bring the appeal.

So the federal appeals judges want the California Supreme Court to answer that question before the case can proceed.




AMERICAblog Gay

—  admin

Breaking Prop 8 news: federal case punted by 9th circuit back to California Supreme Court

There’s a lot of legalese to read through, but the short answer is that the federal court (9th circuit) is handing the case back to the California Supreme Court to determine whether the Protect Marriage crowd has standing to appeal. The brief:

               

Calitics has a quick analysis up:

A further reading of the document issued minutes ago by the 9th Circuit indicates that the court is ready to rule that Prop 8 proponents DO have standing to appeal. In turn, that would enable the 9th Circuit to decide whether Prop 8 is a violation of the 14th Amendment (and obviously it is), a decision that would have major ramifications across California and the country. Here’s what the 9th Circuit said:
If California does grant the official proponents of an initiative the authority to represent the State’s interest in defending a voter-approved initiative when public officials have declined to do so or to appeal a judgment invalidating the initiative, then Proponents would also have standing to appeal on behalf of the State….

We are aware that in California, “All political power is inherent in the people,” Cal. Const. art. II, ? 1, and that to that end, Article II, section 8(a) of the California Constitution provides, “The initiative is the power of the electors to propose statutes and amendments to the Constitution and to adopt or reject them.” We are also aware that the Supreme Court of California has described the initiative power as “one of the most precious rights of our democratic process,” and indeed, that “the sovereign people’s initiative power” is considered to be a “fundamental right.”…

The power of the citizen initiative has, since its inception, enjoyed a highly protected status in California. For example, the Legislature may not amend or repeal an initiative statute unless the People have approved of its doing so….

Similarly, under California law, the proponents of an initiative may possess a particularized interest in defending the constitutionality of their initiative upon its enactment; the Constitution’s purpose in reserving the initiative power to the People would appear to be ill-served by allowing elected officials to nullify either proponents’ efforts to “propose statutes and amendments to the Constitution” or the People’s right “to adopt or reject” such propositions. Cal. Const. art. II, ? 8(a). Rather than rely on our own understanding of this balance of power under the California Constitution, however, we certify the question so that the Court may provide an authoritative answer as to the rights, interests, and authority under California law of the official proponents of an initiative measure to defend its validity upon its enactment in the case of a challenge to its constitutionality, where the state officials charged with that duty refuse to execute it.

So what does that all mean? Let me boil it down. Basically, California’s constitution and various CA Supreme Court decisions in the last few decades have indicated that the initiative power is a right inherent to the people of the state, and does not stem from the Legislature. It sets up the people as a kind of fourth branch of government. And therefore, if the Governor and the Attorney General refuse to defend a proposition in court, that could essentially nullify the fundamental rights of the voters. Since ballot initiatives stem from the people, presumably the people – in the form of the initiative proponents – DO have standing to defend Prop 8 in court and to appeal it to the 9th Circuit in order to preserve the people’s initiative power.

Click over for more.
Pam’s House Blend – Front Page

—  admin

BREAKING: Prop 8 decision from Ninth Circuit coming in 15 minutes (written at 1:45PM Eastern)

At least that’s the message that just dropped into our Inbox. Stay tuned.

***

**UPDATE: Not sure if the opinion will be posted on the 9th Circuit’s Perry miscrosite. But here it is, just in case.

We’ll of course embed the full opinion here at the first available opp.

***

*HERE IT IS: So wait, the case is going back to the CA Supreme Court? Read along and help me figure it out:



1016696o




Good As You

—  admin

Prop 8-supporting pastor bagged on multiple child molestation charges

Isn’t it always the sanctimonious Godly Perverts — who make the most noise about “protecting” marriage from loving same-sex couples — the ones who spend time engaging in horrific acts with those unable to grant consent to any of his urges. (Sac Bee via Queerty):


The pastor of the Rio Linda Baptist Church is being held in Sacramento County Main Jail on million bail, charged with multiple counts of sexual child molestation.

Citrus Heights Police announced late Thursday that Tom Gene Daniels, 48, was arrested Dec. 9. Lt. Ray Bechler said police had postponed publicizing the arrest while they continued their investigation into the case.

If that isn’t enough, Daniels, in addition to his role as pastor, is also a foster parent and day care provider — giving him 24/7 access to children. The crimes allegedly occurred from 2004 to 2007, and multiple victims came forward to name their assailant as Daniels.

Lavender Newswire reported on Daniels’ contributions of 0 and to ProtectMarriage.com. It’s no surprise (as these things go the storyline hardly wavers) that the 110-member congregation at Rio Linda Baptist Church supports Daniels, officially charged with “lewd or lascivious act with a child under 14 and engaging in three or more acts of sexual conduct with a child.”


Pam’s House Blend – Front Page

—  admin

Prop 8-Loving Pastor Tom Daniels Arrested On Child Molestation Charges

Finally someone has volunteered to take Pastor Eddie Long's place in the Disgusting Men Of God headlines contest. Meet Pastor Tom Daniels. He's the head pastor at First Baptist Church in Rio Linda, California, outside Sacramento. He's a proud Prop 8 supporter. Oh, and he's being held on million bond for multiple child molestation charges.

CONTINUED »


Permalink | 10 comments | Add to del.icio.us


Tagged: , , ,

Queerty

—  admin

CALIFORNIA: Pastor Who Backed Prop 8 Held On Multiple Child Molestation Charges

Pastor Tom Daniels of Rio Linda, California is being held on M bail after being charged with multiple felony counts of sexual assault on a child. Lavender Newswire reports that Daniels twice made donations to Protect Marriage, the backers of Proposition 8.

Joe. My. God.

—  admin

Maggie Gallagher: Prop 8 Could Mean The End Of Marriage In The United States

This had to be emailed to me because NOM has blocked me from subscribing to their YouTube channel. WhatEVER for?

Joe. My. God.

—  admin

Prop. 8 Supporters, Foes Watch Hearing

PROP 8 WATCHERS X390 (GRAB) | ADVOCATE.COMAs attorneys argued both sides of Proposition 8 in the ninth circuit
court of appeals Monday, people across the country and around the world
watched the proceedings take place. 
Advocate.com: Daily News

—  admin

Prop. 8 Has Its Day in Court—Again

Jeff Tabaco (L) and Thom Watson PROP 8 X390 (GETTY) | ADVOCATE.COMMarriage advocates — for and against equality — take center stage in San Francisco in the latest chapter of a two-year struggle to overturn California’s antigay Proposition 8.
Advocate.com: Daily News

—  admin

NOM Rides The Prop 8 Waaahbulance

NOM is crying crying crying about today’s Prop 8 hearing at the Ninth Circuit Court.

“This hearing makes a mockery of the federal judiciary,” said Brian Brown, president of NOM. “Citizens are entitled to a guarantee of impartiality from their judiciary. Yet here we have the spectacle of a federal appeals court justice ruling on a case in which his wife represents a group that is a participant. A cynic would be left to wonder if the fix is in for marriage in the Ninth Circuit.”

“The long road to determine the constitutionality of Proposition 8 cannot be allowed to go through the courtroom of a Judge whose wife is a key participant in that case,” said Brown. “It’s obvious that Reinhardt will vote to overturn Prop 8. We can only hope that once this case reaches the U.S. Supreme Court, that the people of California will finally get an impartial day in court. When they do, we are confident that marriage as the union of one man and one woman will be vindicated.”

Sound effect for Miss Brown!

Joe. My. God.

—  admin