Prop. 8 and DOMA: The road to gay marriage - Los Angel Tim

Contents:

• CALIFORNIA VOTERS WILL BE ASKED TO REAFFIRM GAY MARRIAGE PROTECTNS ON 2024 BALLOT
• CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR
• CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR
• PROP 8 LG EXPLAED: WHY GAY MARRIAGE WILL RUME CALIFORNIA
• LAWMAKERS WANT CA VOTERS TO OFFICIALLY STRIKE DOWN PROP. 8, THE BAN ON GAY MARRIAGE MEASURE
• CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR
• CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR.
• WILL CALIFORNIA PROTECT GAY MARRIAGE S NSTUTN?
• PROPOSN 8: WHO GAVE THE GAY MARRIAGE BATTLE?
• PROP. 8 AND DOMA: THE ROAD TO GAY MARRIAGE
• TRANSCRIPT AND AUD: SUPREME COURT ARGUMENTS ON CALIFORNIA GAY MARRIAGE BAN
• UNNSTUTNAL: FERAL COURT OVERTURNS PROPOSN 8, GAY MARRIAGE BAN CALIFORNIA
• PROPOSN 8: GAY MARRIAGE ON CALIFORNIA'S BALLOT

CALIFORNIA VOTERS WILL BE ASKED TO REAFFIRM GAY MARRIAGE PROTECTNS ON 2024 BALLOT

Californians will vote on a proposal to amend the state Constutn on the 2024 ballot to reaffirm gay marriage rights — a ut move that amid natnal anxiety after recent lgs by the nservative-leang U. Although there is no current threat to the legaly of gay marriage, and Print Bin signed a bill safeguardg last year, the Democratic-domant state Legislature is seekg to remove language om California’s Constutn that still f marriage as between a man and outdated state fn has been emed unenforceable and unnstutnal thanks to feral law, but LGBTQ advocy groups are askg voters to repeal and amend the California Constutn to stead explicly state that marriage is “a fundamental right. Gav Newsom was out of state, Senate lear Toni Atks (D-San Diego) signed bills to law on his behalf as the first out gay actg ernor.

Wh over 13 ln vot st, California voters approve Proposn 8 on November 4, 2008, amendg the state’s nstutn to ban same-sex months earlier, May 2008, the California Supreme Court had emed the state’s ban on same-sex marriage unnstutnal, makg California the send state the untry to legalize gay marriage. Californian voters received robolls om former print Bill Clton askg them to vote no on the measure, while actors om the televisn show “Ugly Betty” argued Spanish-language TV spots that votg no “is not about beg gay or straight, ” but “about beg Amerin. ”The Protect Marriage mpaign supportg Proposn 8 nstantly voked the “far-reachg nsequenc” of legal gay marriage, particularly the implitn that school curriculums would be required to teach that gay marriage is “the same as tradnal marriage.

” Pollster David Fleischer, his analysis of the electn rults, found that the greatt shift toward “Y” among uncid voters was “among parents wh children unr 18 livg at home—many of them whe Democrats, ” who feared the effects of legal gay marriage on their children’s public tn.

CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR

READ MORE: The Supreme Court Rulgs That Have Shaped Gay Rights AmeriAlso on This Day History November | 4. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a subsequent legislative attempt to legalize gay marriage.

Supreme Court legalized gay marriage natnally two years 2020, Nevada beme the first state to ensure the right to same-sex marriage s state nstutn. California still has an anti-gay marriage law on the books.

Supreme Court legalized gay marriage natnally two years later. The measure put gay and lbian marriag on hold the state, but a feral appeals urt 2010 emed Proposn 8 se ma s way to the US Supreme Court, which dismissed an appeal 2013 over same-sex marriage on jurisdictnal grounds, lg private parti did not have standg to fend California’s voter-approved ballot measure barrg gay and lbian upl om state-sanctned lg cleared the way for same-sex marriag the state to rume and Proposn 8 has remaed on the books but unenforced. “For the hundreds of thoands of Californians gay and lbian hoeholds who are managg their day-to-day liv, this cisn affirms the full legal protectns and safeguards I believe everyone serv.

CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR

In holdg that Prop 8 nnot stand bee vlat the equal protectn and due procs rights of California’s lbian and gay upl, this cisn adds to the growg nsens urts and legislatur across the untry that there are no good reasons for excludg same-sex upl om marriage.

“The urt examed the range of exc ed by anti-gay groups to jtify this ernment discrimatn agast same-sex upl. The ttimony of leadg experts on everythg om child velopment to adult psychology to the public sts of anti-gay discrimatn laid bare the misrmatn and outright li that anti-gay groups have been phg on the public.

It doubtls will help more people see that anti-gay discrimatn marriage is stctive and unjtifiable. District Judge Vghn Walker led [[Read the cisn]()] the su filed by two gay upl who claimed the ban vlated their civil rights. Gay rights advot and civil libertarians say the battle is a fight for equal rights, while opponents, cludg many relig nservativ, see same-sex marriage as a threat to the “tradnal fay.

PROP 8 LG EXPLAED: WHY GAY MARRIAGE WILL RUME CALIFORNIA

“Proposn 8 fails to advance any ratnal basis sglg out gay men and lbians for nial of a marriage license. The Supreme Court lg on a California law known as Proposn 8 me down to a legal technily but has huge practil effect — rtorg gay marriage the natn’s most populo urt led that proponents of Proposn 8, a ban on gay marriage passed by California voters 2008, did not have the legal right to fend the law the feral Jtice John Roberts, wrg for the urt, said that the proponents — the people who put Proposn 8 on the ballot — had no “personal stake” fendg , at least no more than other ordary cizens of California. To have a se, the standard says, you have to show California Supreme Court led May 2008 that gay upl had a right to marry.

Six months later, Proposn 8 passed wh 52 percent of the vote, haltg gay marriage gay upl then sued feral urt to overturn the ban. The Supreme Court said Wednday that they had no lg was important not jt for what did — clear the way for the rumptn of gay marriage California — but for what didn’t do. The urt ma no lg on whether there is a nstutnal right to gay marriage.

”The lg was much narrower than the other major Supreme Court cisn on Wednday, which held that gay upl who are legally married their stat are entled to feral benefs.

LAWMAKERS WANT CA VOTERS TO OFFICIALLY STRIKE DOWN PROP. 8, THE BAN ON GAY MARRIAGE MEASURE

Gav Newsom told NBC News that gay marriage would rume California wh 30 days. Opponents of gay marriage took heart potg out that the urt was clearly leavg to dividual stat to fe marriage. “The battle is gog to ntue to be fought out at the stat as we fully expected, ” said John Eastman, chairman of the Natnal Organizatn for Marriage, the leadg group opposed to gay marriage.

on the gay liftyle. benefi ts of gay or lbian domtic partnerships.

) If the gay marriage lg is not overturned,. there is no difference between gay marriage and tradnal. schools teachg our kids that gay marriage is okay.

CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR

rights of gay domtic partnerships. wh gays livg the liftyle they choose.

However, while gays have the right to their private liv, they do. If gay activists want to legalize gay marriage,.

WOULD DENY LESBIAN AND GAY COUPLES that same.

CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR.

GAY AND LESBIAN COUPLES AND ANOTHER SET FOR. MARRIAGE FOR GAY AND LESBIAN COUPLES, PEOPLE. everyone California—straight, gay, or lbian—serv.

↑ Huffgton Post, "Supreme Court Rul On Prop 8, Lets Gay Marriage Rume In California, " June 26, 2013. News, "McCa Supports Efforts to Ban Gay Marriage, " June 27, 2008.

WILL CALIFORNIA PROTECT GAY MARRIAGE S NSTUTN?

↑ The Jewish Daily Forward, "Orthodox Jo Fight Agast Gay Nuptials, " Augt 28, 2008. SACRAMENTO — More than 18 years after Gav Newsom fied feral law by issug marriage licens to same-sex upl as San Francis mayor, Print Bin is on the cp of signg legislatn that ensur gay marriag are regnized by the feral ernment and every state the natn. “As much as this is a very important issue to gay and lbian people who are marriag or look forward to beg marriag, ” Michelson said, “I doubt that is the issue that is gog to be at the top of people’s mds when to future printial rac.

PROPOSN 8: WHO GAVE THE GAY MARRIAGE BATTLE?

There’s no ditn, however, that the majory of jtic have much appete to do the same on gay marriage.

PROP. 8 AND DOMA: THE ROAD TO GAY MARRIAGE

In January, the Public Policy Instute of California found that a whoppg 75% of likely voters support a policy allowg gay and lbians upl to marry. Supportg gaymarriage ban.

Opposg gay marriage ban. (AP)A feral judge on Wednday overturned a California ban on same-sex marriage, lg that the Proposn 8 ballot iative was unnstutnal, but a pendg appeal of the landmark lg uld prevent gay weddgs om rumg the state any time lg by U.

TRANSCRIPT AND AUD: SUPREME COURT ARGUMENTS ON CALIFORNIA GAY MARRIAGE BAN

District Judge Vgh Walker, one of three openly gay feral judg the untry, gave opponents of the ntroversial Proposn 8 ballot a major upl wavg rabow and Amerin flags outsi the urthoe cheered, hugged and kissed as word of the lg spread. "Dpe the favorable lg for same-sex upl, gay marriage will not be allowed to rume. California voters passed the ban as Proposn 8 November 2008, five months after the state Supreme Court legalized gay marriage.

"Proposn 8 fails to advance any ratnal basis sglg out gay men and lbians for nial of a marriage license. Ined, the evince shows Proposn 8 do nothg more than enshre the California Constutn the notn that oppose-sex upl are superr to same-sex upl, " the judge wrote a 136-page lg that laid out precise tail why the ban do not pass nstutnal judge found that the gay marriage ban vlat the Constutn's due procs and equal protectn cls.

"Bee Proposn 8 disadvantag gays and lbians whout any ratnal jtifitn, Proposn 8 vlat the Equal Protectn Clse of the Fourteenth Amendment, " the judge sis prevly said an appeal was certa if Walker did not le their favor. "In Ameri, we should uphold and rpect the right of people to make policy chang through the mocratic procs, pecially chang that do nothg more than uphold the fn of marriage that has existed sce the foundg of this untry and beyond, " said Jim Campbell, a lawyer on the fense heard 13 days of ttimony and arguments sce January durg the first trial feral urt to exame if stat n prohib gays om gettg verdict was the send a feral gay marriage se to e down recent weeks. A feral judge Massachetts cid last month the state's legally married gay upl had been wrongly nied the feral fancial benefs of marriage bee of a law preventg the U.

UNNSTUTNAL: FERAL COURT OVERTURNS PROPOSN 8, GAY MARRIAGE BAN CALIFORNIA

Amic experts ttified about topics rangg om the fns of gay parents and relig views on homosexualy to the historil meang of marriage and the polil fluence of the gay rights U. He told Judge Walker that tradn or fears of harm to heterosexual unns were legally sufficient grounds to discrimate agast gay teamed up wh David Boi to argue the se, brgg together the two ligators bt known for reprentg Gee W.

The attorneys also said gay marriage was an experiment wh unknown social nsequenc that should be left to voters to accept or U.

Transcript And Aud: Supreme Court Arguments On California Gay Marriage Ban. The Supreme Court on Tuday heard oral arguments on California's voter-approved gay marriage ban, known as Proposn 8. And, Your Honor, I simply make the observatn that seems implsible the extreme, ankly, for ne jtic to have — to have seen no substantial Feral qutn if is te, as the Rponnts mata, that the tradnal fn of marriage sofar as — sofar as do not clu same-sex upl, sofar as is a genr fn is irratnal and n only be explaed, n only be explaed, as a rult of anti-gay malice and a bare sire to harm.

PROPOSN 8: GAY MARRIAGE ON CALIFORNIA'S BALLOT

But we — we agree that to the extent that the classifitn impacts, as clearly do, same-sex upl, that — that classifitn n be viewed as beg one of sexual orientatn rather than - JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Outsi of the - outsi of the marriage ntext, n you thk of any other ratnal basis, reason, for a State g sexual orientatn as a factor nyg homosexuals benefs or imposg burns on them? What precisely is the way which allowg gay upl to marry would terfere wh the visn of marriage as procreatn of children that allowg sterile upl of different sex to marry would not?