From Yahoo News: A federal judge overturned California's gay-marriage ban Wednesday in a landmark case that could eventually force the U.S. Supreme Court to confront the question of whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to wed.
The ruling by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker touched off a celebration outside the courthouse. Gay couples waved rainbow and American flags and erupted with cheers in the city that has long been a magnet for gays.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100804/ap_on_re_us/us_gay_marriage_trial
So, a gay judge overturns a California law that millions of California voters have voted on.
First, this should have been ruled on before it went to the ballot.
Second, this was an activist judge who decided by himself to invalidate theaw, even though the CA. Surpreme Court said the law did not violate State law, which is more liberal than Federal law. This was a President George H.W. Bush appointment. Thanks George.
Third, in my humble opinion, if a State wants or does not gay marriage, they need to go through the legislative process. California did this. Other States that approved gay marriage did this and I have no problem with that. If a State wants to approve gay marriage through the legislative process, go for it. If a State does not, then so be it. It's a State's right issue.
Yes, this will go to the Supreme Court, sooner, if not later. Then we will see what happens.
Eric Hovde: The Ultimate Carpetbagger
38 minutes ago
It doesn't matter that the judge was gay. He was assigned to this case, he did not pick it. If he were straight, would you have considered him biased if he'd ruled the other way?
ReplyDeleteDid you follow this case as it was tried? I did, extensively. The Yes on 8 side blew it, and blew it big time. Their defense was less than weak, it was almost nonexistant.
This is not a case of judicial activism. Read the verdict. It is thorough, and well reasoned.
Yes, the majority of voters in that election voted for Prop 8. According to this verdict, Prop 8 is un-Constitutional. Un-Constitutional laws cannot stand, even if the majority wishes it. That is one of the big things the Constitution is for. And the Constitution has gotten a lot of lip service from conservatives lately.
Yes, i read the judge's bio and he does rule both ways regarding gay rights. As the more I think about it, I think this was a libertarian judge who made a libertarian ruling.
ReplyDelete