California Supreme Court to rule on Proposition 8

The California Supreme Court is scheduled to decide on the fate of Proposition 8 this morning. Here is a  Q&A on gay marriage that was prepared by Times reporters. Readers can offer their questions and comments below. Times reporters will answer reader questions as soon as the court releases its decision.

What are some tips for reading the state Supreme Court's decision?

The majority decision should be revealed in the first or second page of the ruling and reiterated in its last paragraph. Separate concurring and dissenting opinions would follow.

Counting votes may be tricky because the court is dealing with three different legal issues: whether Proposition 8 amounts to an impermissible revision of the state Constitution; the attorney general's challenge contending that marriage is an "inalienable" right that can't be taken away without compelling justification; and the fate of existing same-sex marriages.

The court's vote on the revision issue, for example, will probably differ from its vote on whether existing marriages should continue to be recognized by the state.

Justices who disagree with the majority file dissents. If they agree with only part of the majority decision, they file an opinion called a partial concurrence and dissent.

During oral argument in March, every justice expressed support for upholding existing marriages. Justice Carlos R. Moreno indicated that he believed Proposition 8 was an illegal revision, a sign that he could dissent on that question.

Moreno might be joined by Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar, a former civil rights lawyer who stressed that the court was dealing with a novel legal question. Werdegar, however, did not join Moreno in voting to put the measure on hold pending the court's ruling.

What is being decided by the California Supreme Court?

The state's top court will rule on whether to uphold or strike down Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. The justices also will decide whether the state will continue to recognize the estimated 18,000 same-sex marriages carried out in 2008.

How did we get to this point?

After San Francisco officials began allowing same-sex couples to wed there in 2004, the courts intervened, invalidating the marriages on grounds that local officials had overstepped their authority.

But in May 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled that the state Constitution protects a fundamental "right to marry" that extends to same-sex couples.

That made California the second state in the union, after Massachusetts, to permit same-sex marriage.

About 18,000 gay and lesbian couples married between June and November, when voters approved Proposition 8, which amended the state Constitution to recognize marriage as only between a man and woman.

Opponents of Proposition 8 appealed to the California Supreme Court to overturn the ballot measure. They contend that the proposition changed the tenets of the state Constitution and therefore amounted to a revision, which can only be placed on the ballot by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature; Proposition 8 reached the ballot after a signature drive.

What do legal experts expect the court to do?

Based on comments the justices made at a hearing earlier this year, most legal experts expect the court to uphold Proposition 8 but continue to recognize the marriages of same-sex couples wed before the November election.

If the court upholds Proposition 8, what happens next?

State officials would continue to prohibit issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Supporters of same-sex marriage, however, are expected to go back to the ballot box as early as 2010 with a constitutional amendment recognizing same-sex marriage.

If Proposition 8 is upheld, would that affect the state's domestic partnership law, which gives same-sex couples the legal rights of marriage?

No. State law surrounding domestic partnerships is separate from the issue of allowing same-sex couples to marry. There is no dispute about the legality of domestic partnerships.

After the California Supreme Court ruled in May 2008 that same-sex couples could marry, the state also began to recognize same-sex couples married out of state.

If Proposition 8 is upheld, would California continue to recognize those couples as married?

That's a question the California Supreme Court will decide.

How have other states handled same-sex marriage?

Most states do not recognize same-sex marriage, either by state law or constitutional amendment. The federal government does not recognize same-sex marriage. Some states, mostly on the West Coast and in the Northeast, offer same-sex couples civil unions or domestic partnerships, giving each partner some of the legal benefits granted to spouses, such as the ability to file joint income tax returns and receive spousal health insurance benefits from government agencies.

Five states now allow same-sex couples to marry: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont and Maine. In New Hampshire, New York and New Jersey, lawmakers are considering legalizing same-sex marriage. In Iowa and Maine, opponents of same-sex marriage say they plan to use the ballot box to overturn decisions to legalize same-sex marriage.

-- Rong-Gong Lin II, Maura Dolan and Jessica Garrison

Comments

[Gary]

The rights of the minority should never be voted by the majority!!!

In California, I do believe that the people have a right to express their opinion, but lets remember 50 years ago people didn't see blacks as equal... 100 years ago people didnt see women as equal, WE HAVE TO KEEP FIGHTING FOR THE MINORITY.

Homosexual Marriages should affect straight lives. It doesnt change HETEROSEXUAL marriages, it doesnt challenge heterosexual lives... if you believe homosexual marriages would have an impact on YOUR life then you're GAY!!!!!

Let these people get married. THEY ARENT HURTING ANYONE. THERE IS NO HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA OR HOMOSEXUAL MAFIA. There's just a boy who loves another boy and wants to get married, what is so wrong with that?
NOTHING!

Most serial killers are straight.
Most rapists are straight.
Most heterosexual marriages end in divorce.
Most pedofiles are straight.

If anyone deserves the right NOT to marry, its heterosexuals lol.

Gay POWER

[JM]

And what about the Mormon church? They violated their tax-exempt status when they started this lobbying campaign to put prop. 8 on the ballot. By law, to maintain tax-exempt status, the church has to stay out of political agendas. Why is this still not being addressed?

[Stevie]

"Some states, mostly on the West Coast and in the Northeast, offer same-sex couples civil unions or domestic partnerships, giving each partner some of the legal benefits granted to spouses, such as the ability to file joint income tax returns and receive spousal health insurance benefits from government agencies."

It is not noted, but should be, that tax returns and spousal benefits from government agencies are benefits only allowable at the state level, since the federal "Defense of Marriage Act" prohibits any recognition of same-sex rights at the Federal level. Same-sex couples are not allowed to file joint tax returns or receive any other federal benefit (such as health insurance for same-sex spouses of federal employees or Social Security survivor benefits) allowed to opposite sex marriages.

[brother unknown]

Nothing is at stake. Proposition 8 is irrelevant.

Marriage is a religious sacrament. All religion remains free under both Federal and State constitutions to marry anyone they wish. In fact, as both Federal and State constitutions bar the State from endorsing religion. The State of California should stop issuing marriage licenses.

The collection of legal obligations currently associated with marriage can be incorporated in a Declaration of Civil Union.
Although, filing of such a declaration is limited to those whom the State deems capable of entering into contracts, it does includes all mentally-competant gays and lesbians.

[ma]

Gays need mental help not marriage. Marriage is between a man and woman who can actually reproduce the natural way and not with modern medicine or science. 2% of the population is gay and they carry the majority of the sexual disease and now to say its ok to get married and raise children is against culture, religion, nature and science. only do through some freak of nature do we have a gay issue. I will not honor nor accept any gay marriage as long as there is a God who condemns these vile act of perversion. I will instruct my kids and grandkids the biblical way and not to accept such behavior. California voters voted gays out and its time for them to move to canada. I will support the voters and their organizations that support one man and one woman. I will give my money to make sure that marriage is sacred with God and say my opinion as I need to say.

[Terry]

IOW the california supreme court will decide in all its wisdom whether or not the freely expressed will of the people of california is worth respecting if they (the csc) can find some idiotic way of getting around it.

that sounds about right.

Thank God I don't live there

[Heather]

Everyone should have equal right to do as they please. Gay or straight we should be able to marry who we want. Its not fair to tell a gay/lesbian couple that they can not marry.

Equality for all!!!
Gay power!!!

[Joe]

To use the same word to describe same sex unions as unions between a man and a woman are disingenuous at best. The dynamics are not identical, therefore, the word's used to describe should not be identical either. That dynamic imo is the ability to reproduce free from proxy. It is scientifically IMPOSSIBLE for two people of the same sex to reproduce in a completely natural way.That is all.

[L.Bolard]

Although I support everybody's right to marry whom they chose, I am tired of the repeated media avalanche of so called information about one right of one special group. We are facing number of hard problems and the same space and time was devoted to health care, housing and living wage for all we would all, gay people too, be better off. Even the paper would have more readers.
And comments as ignorant as that one posted by "gay power" harm rather then help.

[George Olds]

Re:

"Which part of NO is not understood by the gay community?
- Straight Male, on Prop 8 "

Which part of EQUALITY is not understood by the anti-gay 'community'?

[Rovin]

As a proponent of traditional marriage, is there any possibility that the Times could conclude that the state Supreme Court has decided that the will of the MAJORITY of the citizens of California still feel that marrige IS between one man and one woman?

Would it be just as much as to argue that the sanctity of marriage supported by traditionalist, (if the court voted in favor of gay marriage), is an "injustice" or does the Times not allow for an opposing view?

The "blacks and women" argument is a nice straw man by Gary above, but it does not mean that because society still rejects homo-sexualality as equal to, or acceptable to traditional marriage is similar to the previous mistakes made by our society. It is not. Every civil right is afforded to gays in California as the hetero-sex. The term "Marriage" will not change the hearts and minds of many that will never accept this lifestyle as equal or acceptable.

[Cody]

Seriously. I dont understand all the religious fanatics and whoever else who are SO against gay marriage. I'm straight, but have some gay friends. How would them marrying each other hurt me the slightest?

[StraightCivilRightsSupporter]

If a religious institution refuses to marry a gay couple, then fine.

But don't you dare stick your hands into civil society. Why shouldn't they be able to get married at city hall? Because it's "tradition" or "unnatural"?

These couples love each other and want the same rights and responsibilities as marriage. It's not their fault they were born gay (and it's not a choice). Civil unions are not the same thing. "Separate but equal" is unconstitutional, remember?

[Gina]

Unfortunately, the gays are turning into the very same kind of bigots and nasty people that they so vilify. Bigot means the same in the dictionary and it works on both sides. Here in California our family refuses to go near the topic on a ballot or elsewhere because of the nasty and violent attitude of these groups. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. Don't ask us our opinion again because it isn't heard, and that is twice now. Hicks and bigots are on both sides of the fence, and it isn't exclusive to pro or con. Many issues trump this in the world but so be it.

[dre]

"Gay POWER": its an insult to me for you to say that gays are similar to blacks. I was born black, but you chose to be gay. Don't mix the two. We have nothing in common.

[Lauren]

You dont choose to be gay, just like you dont choose your race. Why would anyone "choose" to be the minority and the focus of discrimination? I hope prop 8 is repealed; you cant just take away people's rights like that.
Live and let live.

[dana]

Re:

And what about the Mormon church? They violated their tax-exempt status when they started this lobbying campaign to put prop. 8 on the ballot. By law, to maintain tax-exempt status, the church has to stay out of political agendas. Why is this still not being addressed?

Posted by: JM | May 26, 2009 at 08:04 AM

It's not being addressed because they didn't violate their tax exempt status. Let it go. The state did.

[latinmarine]

I am so fed up with this issue. I've always said "I disagree with the gay lifestyle as long as they leave me alone" Well they're not. That lifestyle continues to disturb the moral fundamentals and foundation that this Great nation was founded upon. Its sad to see and know what is bringing down our nation little by little. We continue to fight for whats pure and traditional according to our nations begining. I do believe that there are some inevitable changes through our nations's histroy that needed to happen. For example, the abolishment of slavery. But same sex marriage is getting out of control and ridiculous. I feel that this lifestyle will only be a spearhed in dividing the US. I try not to fret upon the issue too much though. Our Nation was founded as follows "One Nation under God", not "one nation under the people". Ultimately our God is in control and his will be done. I am a Christian and I do pray for the people of that lifestyle, for our nation's morals and for the traditional truths that man was put on this earth for. God bless.

[Jen]

Those of you claiming that God "condemns these vile acts of perversion" are AWFULLY presumptuous. The God I believe in is tolerant and accepting and celebrates love in all of its forms. You are shockingly hateful, especially when you consider that this issue really does not affect your marriage or your relationship with God in any way. You're on the wrong side of this issue, and you should be ashamed.

I am a straight, married supporter of gay equality and proud of it!!!

[kurt]

why is the state involved with marriage to begin with? Everywhere i turn the state is involved with my life and freedom won't be seen as long as the state has control over our lives- gay or straight

[John]

If I chose to be gay, you chose to be black. Do not comment on things you know nothing about.

[unknown]

As a black person, I feel sick to my stomach seeing the comment below. No one chooses to be who they are. That is up to God and ultimately up to genes. No one should be dictating how someone will live their live based on sexuality or even race, and as a black person who is faced with the constant struggles of discrimination every day you walk the street, you should know that if this is passed again it is not only the downfall of human rights as we know it, it will only take time for it to back peddle onto race. Do not feel as if you are untouchable.

[Christian]

Ladies and Gentlemen, Progress cannot be changed. Many of the anti-gay marriage opinions were heard when interracial marriage was taboo. It is just a matter of time before gay marriage is a non issue.

The ability to have children without the help of science? Really? Then please try to convince the woman who underwent fertility treatment because she had difficulty baring children that she is no longer a mother.

If we are to take the Bible in the literal sense, then we cannot work (including turning on electricity or driving a car) on Sundays, straights cannot have premarital sex, adulterers should be stoned...sounds like the Taliban to me.

[Michael]

Excuse me? Choose to be gay?? That is the most ignorant and stupid thing anyone can say. Who in their right mind would just choose to be gay? You think those gay teens out there who commit suicide because life is so tough just could just choose to be straight? I assume you're straight Dre, let's hear how you CHOSE to be straight. Are you saying that all the gay people out there are born straight, and that they all feel the same way as you do about the opposite sex, but for some reason they just hide their feelings for the opposite sex? Can YOU personally just DECIDE you want to be attracted to the same sex?? Yeah, of course not.. I mean, come on. Think about life for how it is and do so some research before you try and say anything.

[Richard]

I am gay and I have to laugh at these prophets that believe you choose to be gay. I doubt that anyone would choose this lifestyle if given the opportunity. While being gay has become much easier than it was when I was a kid, I still find that statement about choosing to be gay to be really ignorant.

[NC]

I love the comment about the Mormon church. Seriously, it is NOT fact that they violated a Tax Exempt status. Let's not further complicate a situation that has enough going on.

I do believe in the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman. My heart is not full of hate for gay/lesbian couples. I'm just really tired of hearing that because I don't agree, I hate.

I'm not out to discriminate. We both want something. Clear guidelines that both parties can agree on. I think if we can be big enough (as a society) to respect EACH OTHER, this could be resolved more quickly and we would be able to move on to other issues in the country.

[subwarrior]

Thank you Dre!!! Why is it so hard to recognize the difference between a choice and our ethnicity. It is rather frightening that so many people have no common sense.

[California born and bred, Massachusetts educated]

It's comments like those of "ma" which make me utterly gutturally sick.

1. My fathers are quite religious and (gasp) married by their church. Should their church be shut down because they believe in love over judgement?

2. I'm in an 8-year-long heterosexual relationship that (gasp) resulted in heterosexual marriage last year. Oh dear, they have completely screwed me up due to their sick mental state. Oh yeah, I attend Harvard, kicking the ass of children born to heterosexual parents.

3. To those who believe sexual orientation is a "choice": who would CHOOSE to have a life in which he is repeatedly and unfairly judged upon? Read up on scientific studies. Next we will outlaw religious marriages because RELIGION is a CHOICE. Far more so than orientation is, at the very least.

4. A short history lesson: the Bible has been used in the past to advocate limiting rights of slaves AND women. We now realize how very wrong that was. You don't choose your race, gender, nor your sexual orientation. Why should we CHOOSE to discriminate based on any of those?

Finally, I wish people would stop stereotyping religious persons. Not all of them - not all Mormans, not all Christians, etc - are bigoted against GLBT persons. Making broad generalizations about bigotry on their part is just as unfair to them as it is to us. It's easy to be bitter and play the blame game, but that's a CHOICE we don't have to make. We may not choose our sexual orientation, but we can certainly choose how we react to prejudices based upon it.

[Richard]

A lot of people who are so opposed to Gay Marriage have some other issues that they obviously are not dealing with. Two gay people getting married in no way affects straight marriage. It does not diminish what marriage is about. With over 70% of the straight marriages ending in divorce, could gay people do any worse. I doubt it. I also find the religious fanatics quoting scripture from their Bible to be entertaining. What happens if you do not believe in the Christina thing and the Bible? It is more than you are wrong and I am right. Blame it on the writings of religious groups over 2,000 years ago. Things were a tad different then and many things had to be explained out of fear versus science.

[a gay christian]

http://www.dailynebraskan.com/opinion/garvin-arguments-against-same-sex-marriage-are-invalid-1.1641393

Do the research before opening your mouth against equality. Want to protect marriage? Try banning divorce, not same-sex marriage.

Stop using my god to promote your hate.

[John]

If you sincerely care about protecting marriage, ban divorce.

Instead of complaining about the idea of same-sex marriage, put your energy into solving the MANY ills that have plagued heterosexual marriage for a long time, long before same-sex marriage was even a concept:

- Divorce.
- Child abuse.
- Infidelity.
- Spouse abuse.
- Men who father kids, leave & don't support them.
- Ex-husbands who shoot their ex-wives.

A proposition for voters to make divorce illegal would be a good start to actually protecting marriage.

[mmc2068]

dre and subwarrior, while the jury is still out on whether or not I was born gay, even if it were true that I somehow "chose" to be gay (and by the age of 5, no less, when I first got crushes on boys my age), what difference does it make? Black males sometimes "choose" to have sex with and marry white females. Why should their private sexual choice be anyone else's business? Christians "choose" to be religious. Why should their private religious choice be anyone else's business?

And, finally, what makes you all so certain that being gay is a "choice?" Did YOU choose one day not to be gay, after dealing with such feelings for years? Your stance indicates exactly that. If so, then it means you're not really all that straight, doesn't it?

[mmc2068]

And another thing, dre and subwarrior, African-Americans don't lose the love of the families, churches, friends, etc because they are black.

Gays do.

Who, then, has it worse?

[subwarrior]

This nonsensical argument about the rights of a minority is so laughably dull. It pulverizes and murders reason. Look, a minority is someone who is genetically proven to be the way they are, i.e. african-american, asian, indian or whatever. Now most of us are aware the human genome project has been completed and there is no, I repeat no, gay gene!! So for those of you rhapsodizing about the rights of a minority, pray tell, how you have so devastated your reasoning abilities. The argument that it is not hurting anyone is irrelevant. This is a behavior and choice, and as such, is not deserving of societies approbation or recognition. No one is prevented from doing as they wish, but society has the perfect right to only reward those behaviors which contribute to it's future prosperity.

[dh]

To answer Terry, the reason some may label you a discriminator or that you hate is because you fundamentally believe that it is okay to keep rights away from a specific group of people based solely on who they are, not what they chose to be because of what it says in a book. Because really, who would willfully choose to be discriminated against? They hypocrisy is what infuriates me. If a person is going to believe in something in the bible so devoutly yet ignore other, for lack of a better term, instructions on how to live a pure life then it just makes your point void. I think homosexual men and women see through the mask some people hide behind by saying "its my faith that tells me to believe that your a deviant and need psychiatric help"--so if you didn't have this faith it wouldn't matter to you? Really? It is blatant discrimination. Seperate and not equal. Most importantly, our country was founded on those coming to America to escape religious persecution and to live free and to have a government that is free from religion-seperation of church and state if you will ( I know I read that somewhere). So why the hell should it bother you if I want to marry a guy and live my life?

[Robert]

The sanctity of marriage indeed, when over half of them fail and end in divorce. Stupid sad religion. I wish I could be there when they die, and well...nothing happens...other than drying out in a box.

[John]

If there is no definition on who can marry, what will stop people to think that it is okay for a man to have many wives or for someone who really believes they are in love but yet only 12 years old to marry a 40 year old man? This just seems like the beginning of long battle of sexual perversion. Age limits will disappear and the number of spouses will too. There must be laws to protect such things from happening.

[2nd Class Citizen]

The CA Supreme Court is a farce. They're yet another instance of people who can't be fired and thus don't have any real impetus to do a good job. Hopefully, you're all white, male, straight and Christian or don't expect a ruling in your favor. That is, unless you can afford to buy the ruling - in this economy I guess even rights are for sale! I know mine are!

[Barbara Saunders]

Emotions run high in this, but in my view, it comes down to this: Prop 8 supporters won this case because they talked morality and walked law; Prop 8 opponents talked law (and rights) and tried to fight a moral fight in a legal forum.

Personally I support "the legalization of same-sex marriage" (my preferred term over both "gay marriage" and "marriage equality" for reasons I won't expand upon here.) I both hope and believe same-sex marriage proponents will prevail eventually. However, I think winning depends upon playing the game on its own terms - law and not moral righteousness, even when we feel morally righteous.

[Charlie Sweet]

Every state government in the US has been allowed to give out marriage licenses since the dawn of time (figure of speech). THEREFORE the term "marriage" has forever lost its religious sanctity, if you are a law abiding citizen who follows the separation between church and state stipulation. RELIGIOUS BIAS IS COMPLETELY AND WHOLLY IRRELEVANT, AND YET SADLY IT IS THE VERY ARGUMENT THAT IS KEEPING THIS CASE UNDERWATER. People who still believe that their religiously biased voice should be heard through the ballots should move back into the 19th century. also people who believe homosexuality is a choice are ignorant!! and willfully too! man what a backwards country America is.

d(-_-)b

[syddystar]

I personally think a lot of you need to get better aquainted with the issue.
"one right of one special group" It goes so much farther than "one" right. Ive grow up seeing the rights my mother was not allowed simply because she loves women. at the current age of 20 i am doing all i can to make sure others do not have to fight the same battles my mother did.
"cannot have children without the help of science" I am proud to say i am a product of NO scientific form. I was made by a man and a woman and raised by my biological mother and the lovers she was attracted to and i am proud to say i am much more accepting and open with life and others than most people because of it.
"the sanctity of marriage" That was corrupt by divorce. marriage is supposed to be about love, religion is supposed to be about love. "man is made in the image of God" "each is perfect in His eyes" back off and accept your religion and stop adding addendums to it.
"homosexual marriage is going to lead to..." no its not. homosexual marriage will only lead to further spreading the message of love. Love=marriage not sexual gender/orientation. homosexuality is not pedophilia or morminism or beastiality, its exactly like a hetero relationship(or what relationships are supposed to be about) its about love and attraction.
You people need to step off your high horse and learn what this is about, not oppress people and say their love is of less importance than yours. Love is love just let it be.

HOMOPHOBIA needs to STOP.

[David Faubion]

CA SUPREME UPHOLDS BIGOTED PROP. 8

You had to see this coming when the Court allowed the electoral farce know as Prop 8 onto our ballot. The same court that ruled earlier to uphold Constitutional law that forms the right of same-sex marriage then caved to the bigoted obstruction of civil and human rights that come to us directly from our Federal Constitution. Even with the Attorney General upholding law over the petty exclusionary perversion of it could not save the Supreme errand boys of mob rule from caving to the archaic.

Opponents of Prop 8 trusted the multicultural, broadminded consciousness of the California Electorate. The opponents underestimated the lawless mob rule of the homophobic frenzy and its exclusive club known as marriage. Join the opponents of this lawless chaos in their fight to bring back the rule of law to its seat of supremacy over the tyranny of the mob.

The mob has no rational argument that justifies the exclusion of same-sex marriage. At least three major rational arguments exist for the same-sex marriage: Rule of law, equality under the law and, thus, security for same-sex couples, and the logical, undeniable boost to our shared economy.

[David Faubion]

CA SUPREME UPHOLDS BIGOTED PROP. 8

You had to see this coming when the Court allowed the electoral farce know as Prop 8 onto our ballot. The same court that ruled earlier to uphold Constitutional law that forms the right of same-sex marriage then caved to the bigoted obstruction of civil and human rights that come to us directly from our Federal Constitution. Even the Attorney General upholding law over the petty exclusionary perversion of it could not save the Supreme errand boys of mob rule from caving to the archaic.

Opponents of Prop 8 trusted the multicultural, broadminded consciousness of the California Electorate. The opponents underestimated the lawless mob rule of the homophobic frenzy and its exclusive, largely dysfunctional club known as marriage. Join the opponents of this lawless chaos in their fight to bring back the rule of law to its seat of supremacy over the tyranny of the mob.

This mob has no rational argument that justifies the exclusion of same-sex marriage. At least three major rational arguments exist for the same-sex marriage: Rule of law, equality under the law and, thus, security for same-sex couples, and the logical, undeniable boost to our shared economy.