Is Prop 8 Terminated? (original) (raw)

Family Leader

After millions of dollars and millions of votes, Proposition 8 in California passed in support of marriage between a man and a woman with 52% of the vote. Last month, Judge Vaughn Walker from San Francisco ruled that Prop 8 was unconstitutional. Now, the 9th Circuit of Appeals has agreed to hear the appeal in December, but there may not be anyone from California to defend the case. The California Supreme Court has refused to order Governor Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown to appeal the ruling.

Both Gov Schwarzenegger and General Brown have refused to defend the law citing that they are not in favor of it. Brown initially pledged to defend Prop. 8 after it passed in 2008. He said, “For the record, I voted against Prop. 8 and still don’t like it. But I think the will of the majority should be supported by the state.” Brown soon reneged on his pledge, asserting that the ban on same-sex marriage extinguishes “fundamental constitutional rights.” Hi about face most likely has to do with his run for governor. Meanwhile, his opponent, Meg Whitman, recently stated that if elected governor, she would defend Proposition 8.

The governor and attorney general have come under heavy criticism for refusing to defend the case. California’s top public lawyer and it’s chief executive have a constitutional duty to defend the laws on the books whether they agree with them or not. This includes a ban on same-sex marriage. The Attorney General is obligated to “prosecute or defend all causes to which the state or any state officer is a party.” This sentiment is echoed by Chris Gacek, senior fellow at the Family Research Council, “This brings up the real possibility of collusive litigation,” he says, “that the attorney general could have this weird kind of veto over statutes passed by the legislature and governor,” he says, adding, “just don’t defend them in court and they become null and void.”

Because the Governor and Attorney General refuse to hear the case, the ultimate question is whether there is standing for the appeal. This means that someone must have a direct, personal injury. Some question whether anyone meets this qualification. A Los Angeles Times editorial says that rather than let the appeal die for lack of standing, “the state could best fulfill its obligation by hiring an outside attorney to represent it in the appeal.”

Mr. Ritter, a partner at Ritter & Associates said that, “It is my expectation that the California Supreme Court, and even possibly the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, will allow some entity, possibly private, to make the arguments on behalf of Proposition 8 that are necessary for a full and complete hearing as to the law’s validity. “ Let’s hope that this is the case because It would be an affront to justice if not only did one judge overturn 52% of voters in California but that no one be allowed to argue the appeal.