Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
Federal 9th Circuit judges uphold overturning of California Proposition 8
|
February 7, 2012
California: On Tuesday, February 7, a three judge appellate panel from the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit issued its ruling in Perry v. Brown which upheld the rulings by district court judges Vaughn Walker and James Ware which overturned California's Proposition 8 which blocked same sex marriage in the state. The panel, consisting of Judges Michael D. Hawkins, Stephen Reinhardt and Randy Smith, stated that “Proposition 8 served no purpose, and had no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California." The court ruled that the same-sex marriage ban violated the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. The ruling states:
- Although the Constitution permits communities to enact most laws they believe to be desirable, it requires that there be at least a legitimate reason for the passage of a law that treats different classes of people differently. There was no such reason that Proposition 8 could have been enacted... Under California statutory law, same-sex couples had all the rights of opposite-sex couples, regardless of their marital status...
In effect, the court concluded that, because domestic partnerships had already established equal rights for same-sex couples, the measure only served to deny these relationships the designation of "marriage." This, according to the court, was not a legitimate purpose for treating these couples differently under the law. The panel rendered split in its decision with Judge Randy Smith concurring in part and dissenting in part. The panel upheld both the decisions of Chief Judge Ware as well as Senior Judge Walker, whose original decision has been challenged on the grounds that Walker had an undisclosed long term relationship with another man at the time of the case. The ruling clears the way for the Supreme Court to weigh in on the subject next year.[1] For expansive coverage of the ballot measure and ensuing legal controversy, please see: California Proposition 8, the "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry" Initiative (2008).
In a separate ruling, on Thursday, the same panel refused to release the videos from the original trial. The panel held that Walker “promised the litigants that the conditions under which the recording was maintained would not change — that there was no possibility that the recording would be broadcast to the public in the future.” Because of this, the judges determined that, “The integrity of our judicial system depends in no small part on the ability of litigants and members of the public to rely on a judge’s word. The record compels the finding that the trial judge’s representations to the parties were solemn commitments,” and that the video's should not be released.[2]
See also
External links
- Dallas Voice, "Court won’t release videos from Prop 8 trial," 2/3/2012
- LA Times Blog, "Prop. 8: Gay-marriage ban unconstitutional, court rules" 2/7/2012
- Ruling:Perry v. Brown
Footnotes
| |||||
Federal courts:
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals • U.S. District Court: Central District of California, Eastern District of California, Northern District of California, Southern District of California • U.S. Bankruptcy Court: Central District of California, Eastern District of California, Northern District of California, Southern District of California
State courts:
California Supreme Court • California Courts of Appeal • California Superior Courts
State resources:
Courts in California • California judicial elections • Judicial selection in California
