Southern California -- this just in

« Previous Post | L.A. NOW Home | Next Post »

Prop. 8 proponents file emergency appeal to block gay marriage

In an emergency appeal, backers of Proposition 8 told a federal appeals court that last week's ruling permitting same-sex marriage in California was riddled with both factual and legal errors and should be blocked.

Attorneys for ProtectMarriage.com, the campaign that sponsored the 2008 anti-gay marriage measure, said in a 73-page appeal that Chief U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn R. Walker ignored the law and tradition by concluding that gays should be entitled to marry.

"The district court simply ignored virtually everything -- judicial authority, the works of eminent scholars past and present in all relevant academic fields, extensive documentary and historical evidence, and even common sense -- opposed to its conclusions," the ProtectMarriage lawyers wrote.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will decide whether to block Proposition 8 pending other appeals. Walker extended a temporary hold on his ruling until Wednesday. If the 9th Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court does not place a hold on his ruling by them, same-sex marriages may be permitted in California.

-- Maura Dolan in San Francisco

Comments () | Archives (105)

Funny how homosexuals cry hatred when a normal man and a normal woman define their union as 'marriage.' But then again, who said homosexuals are normal?

"Why is the gays and lesbians don't understand is this: in a democracy, the majority rules good or bad!"

I would also like to point out that the United States is not a Democracy, it is a Federal Constitutional Republic

The suit is based upon descrimination due to sexual orientation. There is nothing descriminatory. Any woman (lesbian or not) is allowed to "marry" any man, and vice-a-versa. Should men be allowed to use the woman's bathroom? Should straight soldiers be forced to share showers with gay men? Should straight soldiers be allowed into the opposite sex's showers and latrines? Prop 8 does not deny gay people the "right" to marry. They can marry anyone of the opposite sex, just like straight people. Blind people are not allowed to drive and they are a protected class. Are laws protecting children against pedophiles age discrimination? Should Hooter's be required to hire fat, beer belly hairy dudes as waiters? Should citzens of foreign national origin be granted unrestricted entry and stay in the United States? (national origin is a protected class), Should militants be allowed to profess and organize the overthrow of the US and the Constitution? (freedom of speech and assembly) Should a straight group of people be allowed to petition their government for redress of grievances related to same sex marriage and prevail? Can we just pass a law stating that whatever rights and privleges are afforded to married persons are granted to same sex civil unions??????

For the first time - I am rooting for the anti Prop 8 group to have the necessary standing to appeal the District Court's decision. I want the 9th Circuit to decide because once Prop 8 is finally overturned we can be done with this issue until the US Supreme Court decides. Gay marriage is a NON ISSUE. There is no reason today to ban it and the government has no overriding interest in doing so.

The majority does NOT rule. Over and over again, courts routinely rule against majority votes that exist to disadvantage an unpopular minority. In the case of inter-racial marriage, it took until the 1990s for half of Americans to approve--even though the landmark Loving v. Virginia decision was in '67. IN California in the 1963, a majority of voters tried to overturn the Fair Housing law, and their majority vote was overturned by the US Supreme court.

The US is not a direct democracy. Majority doesn't rule. We are a constitutional democracy, and the Constitution exists to protect the rights of everyone. Whether they are poor, female, gay, or Muslim: the COnstitution protects ALL of us from the tyranny of the majority. Perhaps some of the letter writers should go back to 8th grade civics and learn how our government works.

The people of California voted for Proposition 8, it must be honored. We must bring Godly values back to California and the rest of the country. All corrupted government employees must be terminated in California, with no pension plan. And, let them collect social security at full retirement age.

Pretty sure the Judge ruled that way BECAUSE of judicial authority and precedence. Separate but Equal has been unconstitutional since desegregation.

Why are they projecting their own mistakes onto the judges?

What damage does same sex marriage do to Californians? To Judge Walker: to encourage the sexual activity of a highest-risk AIDS & STD's group is against common sense and a health and safety risk for the state of California. The Center for Disease Control should be ashamed of themselves for not supporting Prop 8.

Briefly -CA is broke because gays can't marry here. With the most disposable income they'd bring a fortune here. The Founding Fathers knew that any religious tyranny would destroy the country - so they built in multiple protections. Majority rules is precisely why we have judges - to defend EVERYONE'S rights - not just the (moral) majority. Don't like same sex marriage? Don't marry someone of the same sex. Duh. "When the rights of one man are diminished the rights of every man are diminished.". JFK

To Warren re: "right-wing Christian nuts" who proposed Prop 8. What you said in comments is biased slander and may potentially incite a hate crime towards a religious group. Check your First Amendment right at the hate crime door; religions are protected too.

If the (slim) majority rules, shouldn't the U.S. still be a colony of the British (since at the time there were more British than Colonials)? The argument is as fallacious as any other proposed that suggests that might is right.

This is not a democracy. It is a constitutional republic. The judicial branch has the power of review.

As I had stated in a previous entry--NO GOVERNMENT has the right to RE-DEFINE an institution which was CREATED by the CHURCH in the first place! I'm NOT a BIGOT, but the bottom line (no pun intended)is that THE STATE AND CHURCH are (WERE!) considered seperate BUT EQUAL. Therefore, The State has NO RIGHT to demand a religious SACRAMENT be reinterpreted to BE ALL INCLUSIVE...

The whole point of the judiciary is to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. In this case, the vote by the majority is completely irrelevant. The judge is correct.

What's hilarious is they poured hundreds of millions of dollars of their own household budgets into this failed attempt to trample the US Constitution, they even passed the plate around at church and quite illegally funded this hate campaign. Just think of all the homeless widows and hungry children they could have fed and sheltered. Jesus must be so proud of the religious right. (wrong)

Marriage is between one man and one woman. Voting makes no sense when a single judge can overturn the will of the people. I didn't vote for Obama, thus, I just need to find a judge who will overturn the last federal election, since the majority no longer have any rights. My civil rights are being violated by this President.

Do you all see how silly this is?

Say Mr. (Ms?, Bi?, Tri, Tran?, don't know?) @ Felix... that "illiterate electorate" you refered to; ("One reason this proposition had to go to trial was due to an illiterate electorate." comment on page 2), would this be the SAME "illiterate electorate", ...body of TAXPAYERS, that you FULLY EXPECT to pick up your (or your "gay" friends) HIV/AIDS deathbed MEDICAL BILLS because you/they decided to live the reckless, self-gratified, careless, carefree "wheeeeee I'm so "gay"" lifestyle?
Pointed question, uncomfortable question, isn't it?

"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."
Thomas Jefferson

The majority of people in Nazi Germany thought that Jews were inferior at the peak of Hitler's reign. The majority should never have the right to put the civil rights of the citizenry up to vote. Period. My rights as a gay man are not negotiable. You can't vote on them. They are inalienable.

Forty six years ago we heard the same arguments only the issue was racially mixed marriage with the usual predictions for "the end of Western Civilization." . The supreme court decision in 1964 ended that inequality. You cannot ban gay marriage any more than you would ban free speech--though I am sure sure lots of right wing nutcakes would love to do so. America is still a free country--whether you like it or not.

73 pages FAIL! most of the pages are addresses, and the last page is a addendum to be allowed to file a LARGE SIZED font brief (to make it appear longer then it is) the arguments are laughable! god love the lawyers i hope they suck every last dime out of these family heating anti gay groups!

I read the full text of the original lawsuit against Proposition 8, brought before Judge Walker. There are only four original defendants listed there and all four are California state officials (namely Governor Schwarzeneger, Attorney General Jerry Brown, the head the California Department of Public Health, and one other state officer). Proposition 8 lawyers were only allowed into the case as intervenors. Since these lawyers are not the actual defendants in the case, they by themselves have no legal authority whatsoever to appeal Walker's decision, not in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, NOT ANYWHERE. In point of fact, the only reason they were even able to get their foot inside Walker's courtroom to argue their case was that Walker allowed them to as a matter of his own discretion, not because they had their own right to do so. There we have it. Case closed!

Why didn't the vote of the people of California count? This should be over.

The gays and lesbians should bow to the vote of the people and it should not have gone any farther. They are just throwing an fit and the Judge gave in.

Shame on the Judge for allowing the gs ad ls to destroy the sanctity of marriage. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman. Why should it change now!

« | 1 2 3 4 5 | »


Recommended on Facebook


In Case You Missed It...


About L.A. Now
L.A. Now is the Los Angeles Times’ breaking news section for Southern California. It is produced by more than 80 reporters and editors in The Times’ Metro section, reporting from the paper’s downtown Los Angeles headquarters as well as bureaus in Costa Mesa, Long Beach, San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Riverside, Ventura and West Los Angeles.
Have a story tip for L.A. Now?
Please send to newstips@latimes.com
Can I call someone with news?
Yes. The city desk number is (213) 237-7847.


Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: