Prop 8. Decision!

[Cite134]

Ugh, just got into a LONG 'debate' about this on faceboook... >.>. Nonetheless, this is a step. Great news!

[Tank]

Ugh, just got into a LONG 'debate' about this on faceboook... >.>. Nonetheless, this is a step. Great news!

Link to debate please.  

[Sophus]

Judge Walker to rule on same-sex marriages today - will determine if they can resume immediately

[Tank]

I hope he does allow the immediate restart as it sends a clear signal that the California legislature are a strong legislature and don't need their decisions rubber stamped for them. To wait for that later hearing would just send a message of 'we're not sure, lets wait till mummy gets home and ask her.'

[Sophus]

I hope he does allow the immediate restart as it sends a clear signal that the California legislature are a strong legislature and don't need their decisions rubber stamped for them. To wait for that later hearing would just send a message of 'we're not sure, lets wait till mummy gets home and ask her.'

Good point. I'm predicting he will. Judging from his explosive language in the 136 page ruling, Walker seems to have a very firm stance on this.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The LA Times is reporting he will issue his decision before noon PST.

[pinkocommie]

This just in:  http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/08/12/walker-lifts-stay-on-prop-8-ruling-gay-marriages-to-resume-next-week/

San Francisco Federal Judge Vaughn Walker on Thursday lifted the stay on his ruling from last week, in which he found that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.

One caveat: Walker extended a temporary stay until August 18, in order to give Proposition 8 supporters â€" and the defendants in the case â€" time to appeal the ruling to the Ninth Circuit. So gay marriage cannot yet resume in the Golden State.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Yes.  I'm now wondering if it will be appealed at all.  His reasoning is solid, sound, and if his reasoning carries the Supreme Court, the appellants will have to resort to the Amendment process, and I don't think that will work.

[Cite134]

I hope he does allow the immediate restart as it sends a clear signal that the California legislature are a strong legislature and don't need their decisions rubber stamped for them. To wait for that later hearing would just send a message of 'we're not sure, lets wait till mummy gets home and ask her.'

I go by the name of "Legit." It was indeed quite frustrating.
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/pro ... 5302533211

[Cite134]

ugh, wrong quote tank...ahah. But here there is the link if you're interested. If you find anything inaccurate in my responses PLEASE point them out if you can .

[Sophus]

Some less than great news.

url=http://www.turlockjournal.com/news/article/5228/]Turlock Journal[/url]"]California’s ban on same-sex marriages, scheduled to end today, will last at least until December.

[NothingSacred]

:bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  :bananacolor:  This is awesome! Let's just hope that the douchebag brigade doesn't drag this out!

[Sophus]

This is really looking up because it seems gay-rights is becoming more and more important to a number of Republicans. Hopefully this means Obama will be less afraid to stand up for it too (honestly, I think he is for gay marriage but is playing it politically safe).

One question about this Prop 8 case, which states will it affect should it make its way to the Supreme Court? All thirty some states that put the issue up to a vote, all fifty states, or California alone?

[Recusant]

If the Supreme Court of the US takes the case on and rules that bans on gay marriage are unconstitutional, then according to my understanding, the 14th Amendment is applicable, which means that the bans nationwide will be struck down. I would imagine that there would then be some sort of attempt to get around the Supreme Court's ruling. I'm only a desultory amateur "legal scholar" though, not even a jail-house lawyer, so my understanding may be incorrect.  

[Sophus]

I was hoping that would be the case. California's laws on this issue are more complex than most states. Hope there's not a loophole of some sort. If it the case I and if the Prop 8 supporters lose for a second time I wonder if if they will avoid taking it to the Supreme Court so as to prevent the possibility handing the entire nation over to Satan.