Transcript And Aud: Supreme Court Arguments On California Gay Marriage Ban : NPR

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
• 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
• THE PROP. 8 CASE: YOU MIGHT NOT BE GAY, BUT YOU MIGHT BE NEXT
• JUDGE STRIK DOWN PROP. 8, ALLOWS GAY MARRIAGE CALIFORNIA
• PROPOSN 8: WHO GAVE THE GAY MARRIAGE BATTLE?
• TRANSCRIPT AND AUD: SUPREME COURT ARGUMENTS ON CALIFORNIA GAY MARRIAGE BAN
• SUPREME COURT BOLSTERS GAY MARRIAGE ADVOT DOMA, PROP 8 RULGS
• UNNSTUTNAL: FERAL COURT OVERTURNS PROPOSN 8, GAY MARRIAGE BAN CALIFORNIA

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

The measure put gay and lbian marriag on hold the state, but a feral appeals urt 2010 emed Proposn 8 unnstutnal. The 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 wedlock.

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.

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

” 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. READ MORE: The Supreme Court Rulgs That Have Shaped Gay Rights AmeriAlso on This Day History November | 4.

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.

PROP 8 LG EXPLAED: WHY GAY MARRIAGE WILL RUME CALIFORNIA

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.

California still has an anti-gay marriage law on the books. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a subsequent legislative attempt to legalize gay marriage. Supreme Court legalized gay marriage natnally two years later.

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.

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

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 PROP. 8 CASE: YOU MIGHT NOT BE GAY, BUT YOU MIGHT BE NEXT

”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. 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.

JUDGE STRIK DOWN PROP. 8, ALLOWS GAY MARRIAGE CALIFORNIA

“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.

PROPOSN 8: WHO GAVE THE GAY MARRIAGE BATTLE?

schools teachg our kids that gay marriage is okay.

rights of gay domtic partnerships. wh gays livg the liftyle they choose. However, while gays have the right to their private liv, they do.

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

If gay activists want to legalize gay marriage,. WOULD DENY LESBIAN AND GAY COUPLES that same.

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.

SUPREME COURT BOLSTERS GAY MARRIAGE ADVOT DOMA, PROP 8 RULGS

↑ The Jewish Daily Forward, "Orthodox Jo Fight Agast Gay Nuptials, " Augt 28, 2008. Proposn 8 tak somethg the California Supreme Court already found to be a fundamental right — the right to marry — away om a historilly disadvantaged mory — gay people.

If the California Constutn n be amend to take the right to marry away om gay people, then any fundamental right uld be snatched away om any group that’s outnumbered at the pollg plac.

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

As one of the signs seen at the massive protts that have taken place around the untry the wake of Proposn 8 says, “You may not be gay – but you might be next. Jason Farago: To predict a supreme urt lg would be folly, but the veteran attorney's argument that gay rights are civil rights has momentum. Reportg om San Francis and Los Angel — The feral judge who overturned Proposn 8 Wednday said the ballot iative that banned same-sex marriage was based on moral disapproval of gay marriage and orred the state to stop enforcg the ban.

The lg stck down Proposn 8 as a vlatn of feral nstutnal guarante of equal protectn and due ced extensive trial evince to support his fdg that there was not even a ratnal basis for excludg gays and lbians om marriage. The cisn would appear to lay any rumptn of gay marriage the state. “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, ” the ernor said.

Supporters of Proposn 8 argued durg the trial that same-sex marriage would unrme the stutn of marriage and that children fare bt wh both a mother and a challengers prented wns who ced studi that showed children reared om birth by gay and lbian upl do as well as children born to oppose-sex fai. They also ttified that the clamor for marriage the gay muny had given the stutn of marriage greater trial appeared to be a lopsid show for the challengers, who lled 16 wns, cludg rearchers om the natn’s top universi, and prented tearful ttimony om gays and lbians about why marriage mattered to backers of Proposn 8 lled only two wns, and both ma ncsns unr cross-examatn that helped the other sponsors plaed that Walker’s pretrial lgs had been unfair and that some of their prospective wns cid not to ttify out of fear for their Walker led that he would broadst portns of the trial on the Inter, Proposn 8 proponents fought him all the way to the U. Wednday’s lg stemmed om a lawsu filed last year by two homosexual upl who argued that the marriage ban vlat their feral nstutnal rights to equal protectn and due anticipatn of a California Supreme Court lg upholdg Proposn 8, the su was the brachild of a gay polil strategist Los Angel who formed a nonprof to fance the group hired two legal lumari om oppose sis of the polil spectm to try to overturn the ballot measure.