Today's 9th Circuit Court Decision on CA Prop 8.

Here is the full court decision upholding the original decision that ruled  California's  Proposition 8, (the ban of same sex marriage) to be unconstitutional

Ninth Circuit Prop. 8 decision

So what does this mean exactly?  Is same sex marriage now legal (again...) in  California?   Well, no.  Or more accurately , not yet.   There is still a Stay of the ruling in place  pending an appeal by  the proponents of Prop 8.  That means same sex marriages  cannot yet  resume in California.   This decision also, only applies to  Proposition 8 in California, and has no effect on laws in any other state or on any federal laws  (i.e. the Defense of Marriage Act).

So yes,  today's court ruling is  good news. But  nothing has actually changed  yet as a result of it.

There is a lot to take in when you read the actual text of the  2-1 court ruling but  here is  a passage that stands out:

"Although the Constitution permits communities to enact most laws they believe to be desirable, it requires that there be at least a legitimate reason for the passage of a law that treats different classes of people differently. There was no such reason that Proposition 8 could have been enacted."

So just  to be clear,   the 9th Circuit Appeals Court today ruled that Prop 8 served no other purpose than to discriminate against Gays and Lesbians. This is significant,  in so much that it highlights the weakness of the one dissenting opinion in the 2-1 ruling.   The voice of dissent belongs to Judge N. Randy Smith.  Smith is a former head of the Idaho Republican Party, and was the lone vote in favor to uphold Prop 8.

Smith,  in his dissenting opinion could only raise the completely unrelated issue of parenting. Suggesting that if Gays and Lesbians can get married,  it somehow would mean fewer children would have Parents.. uh... huh?   How does that work exactly? (Smith didn't offer any explanation.)   It is also interesting to note that  Smith is also a Mormon.

Why is that relevant?  The opponents of Marriage Equality claimed that  the original 2009 ruling by   Judge Vaughn R. Walker  was invalid because Walker was Gay.   It is interesting to note  the plaintiffs in this case made no such similar  accusations against Smith, even though  The  Mormon Church was the single largest backer of Proposition 8.

So what happens next? That's a good question. The proponents of Prop 8 will undoubtedly appeal, so  they could go one of two ways. They could make a motion for rehearing in front of the broader Ninth Circuit (11 judges). If a majority of the circuit judges agree to rehear the case, the case would stay at this appellate level and go through  same process all over again in front of a larger panel. Or the Proponents could skip that step and decide to appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In the meantime we can all enjoy the reaction on the  WingNut Bigoted Right as the American Taliban has pretty much lost their minds over today's ruling.  Shrieking hysterically about  "Activist Judges".  Everyone's favorite white supremacist nutcase,  Tony Perkins.  Head of the ridiculously  mis-named hate group  the "Family Research Council" pretty much soiled his adult diaper riding the  Waaaa-mbulance with rage after today's decision.

"This ruling substitutes judicial tyranny for the will of the people, who in the majority of states have amended their constitutions, as California did, to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman. However, we remain confident that in the end, the Supreme Court will reject the absurd argument that the authors of our Constitution created or even implied a 'right' to homosexual 'marriage,' and will instead uphold the right of the people to govern themselves.   


Yeah, because we have always allowed people to vote on the civil rights of other Americans.... right?




If the United States Supreme Court were to uphold the original Walker ruling, then like in the case of  Lawrence v. Texas,  suddenly ALL bans on same sex marriage across the United States would be unconstitutional.   This would also overturn the Defence of Marriage Act. (DOMA).  The  federal law banning recognition of same sex marriages.

That my friends,  is the endgame.    So while today's ruling is nice,  it is still only one more step on a very long road.  Albeit, a step in the right direction.

Why Prop 8 Was Completely Anti-American

The celebrations  here in San Francisco  are  still going on at this hour.   The rally which began in  the Castro District soon turned in to a  celebratory march that  shut down half  of  Market Street  as it made its way to Civic Center Plaza in front of   SF City Hall.

There  were  speeches,  (lots of speeches), music, flags, banners and lots of  joy. Even though  the decision  in  Perry v. Schwarzenegger,  won't go into effect  today.  (There is a two day  time frame for the court to consider  a motion by opponents of  Marriage Equality to stay the the resumption  of  same sex marriages  in California  while  they appeal this case  to the  U.S. Supreme Court.)  Yet the sense of vindication and  victory in  the California  LGBT community  is  clear  for everyone to see.

So what does this all mean?    Does this mean  Same Sex  Marriage  will soon be  sweeping the nation?  Well,  not so much.    The ruling  simply says the State of California  can't  ban  gay marriage  here in  CA.   Which is  largely symbolic.   There still is no Federal  recognition of  same sex marriages.  Same sex  spouses  still can't  file joint  Federal  Income Tax forms,   pass on  Social Security Survivor  benefits  or  sponsor their  husband or wife  for  immigration to the  U.S.

All of those  key benefits  associated with marriage  are  regulated on  Federal level  by the  ridiculously   mis-named  "Defense of Marriage Act".  (DOMA) and  at least for now,  that law  is unchanged.    Should  the Perry case  make it to the  U.S. Supreme Court,(which it is pretty safe to say it  most likely will),   that  law could  very well change.   Should the  nine SCOTUS  Justices  uphold  the  ruling made today,  it would  in effect  nullify  all  laws  banning Marriage  Equality  in the  United States.

So why did the  pro- Prop 8 forces  lose?   I will  talk about  the  legal  issues  in  a minute.  but  what  was  amazing about this  court  case  was  how  the  supporters of  Prop 8  were  completely  unable to  provide any real  evidence  backing up  their  positions.    I could  go on  and on about  how hollow and   empty  the  Yes On 8 arguments  were, but  Rachel Maddow does it so much better than  I could:



We''ll set the spectacle  of  the  Prop 8 trial,  and  the inherent silliness of  the attempt to use "Gay is Bad  because God Says So" as a legal  argument,  aside for the moment.   the biggest reason why the plaintiffs in this case won,  and  why Prop 8 is completely unconstitutional  is very simple.    So  allow me to  lay it out for you .

1)  Same Sex Marriage doesn't threaten or impact ANYONE ELSE'S  marriage  or family  in any way.
2) You cannot  put  the civil rights of  a minority  up  to  popular vote. Rights  are not subject to the whims of  the electorate  that is why they are  RIGHTS.
3)  Just because you don't like a particular minority,  doesn't mean you get to make them 2nd Class Citizens

Judge Walker,  puts it  even more clearly on page  116 of  his ruling where he writes that;

 "fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote, they depend on the outcome of no elections"

This  is why Proposition 8 is fundamentally un-American, and  un-constitutional.

Prop 8 took  the whole idea  of   fundamental rights laid out  in  the Declaration of  Independence and  the U.S. Constitution and said  that  they were not inalienable.  But rather subject to the mood  of  at least 51% of  whoever shows up to vote in a given election.  That is not democracy, that is electorally sanctioned discrimination,   and it was an affront to everything  our country stands for, and  everything our nation's  founding fathers stood for.

Proposition 8,  denied  basic, fundamental  civil rights  to  an entire group of  Californians,  based  solely on a desire by  groups like the Mormon Church and  Conservative Evangelicals, to put into civil law their belief that  God hates Gay people.  So therefore  the law should treat them as less than everybody else.

If the  U.S.  Supreme Court fails to uphold  today's ruling,  they will have said that  the United States of America is no better than the Taliban.