Comments on: On the Petition to Overturn Proposition 8 http://www.kipesquire.net/2008/11/on-the-petition-to-overturn-proposition-8/ A Stitch in Time Saves Nine ... But Haste Makes Waste Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:02:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Below The Beltway » Blog Archive » California Gay Marriage Ban Headed Back To Court http://www.kipesquire.net/2008/11/on-the-petition-to-overturn-proposition-8/comment-page-1/#comment-7873 Below The Beltway » Blog Archive » California Gay Marriage Ban Headed Back To Court Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:20:28 +0000 http://www.kipesquire.net/?p=7073#comment-7873 [...] Eugene Volokh thinks that the opponents have Proposition 8 have an uphill battle ahead of them and Kip Esquire seems to agree. Related PostsCalifornia’s Proposition 8 To Face Court [...] [...] Eugene Volokh thinks that the opponents have Proposition 8 have an uphill battle ahead of them and Kip Esquire seems to agree. Related PostsCalifornia's Proposition 8 To Face Court [...]

]]> By: Why the Yes on Proposition 8 Folks Don’t Want to Go to Court | Brief Episode http://www.kipesquire.net/2008/11/on-the-petition-to-overturn-proposition-8/comment-page-1/#comment-7858 Why the Yes on Proposition 8 Folks Don’t Want to Go to Court | Brief Episode Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:42:48 +0000 http://www.kipesquire.net/?p=7073#comment-7858 [...] KipEsquire notes in one of his hasty [...] [...] KipEsquire notes in one of his hasty [...]

]]> By: Dr. Grumpus http://www.kipesquire.net/2008/11/on-the-petition-to-overturn-proposition-8/comment-page-1/#comment-7831 Dr. Grumpus Sat, 08 Nov 2008 03:05:38 +0000 http://www.kipesquire.net/?p=7073#comment-7831 P.S. I know that the article does not suggest that the actual suit filed is focused on eliminating marriage across the board, but I'm assuming that it is addressed in Allred's petition to the court to stay the decision. P.S. I know that the article does not suggest that the actual suit filed is focused on eliminating marriage across the board, but I'm assuming that it is addressed in Allred's petition to the court to stay the decision.

]]> By: Dr. Grumpus http://www.kipesquire.net/2008/11/on-the-petition-to-overturn-proposition-8/comment-page-1/#comment-7830 Dr. Grumpus Sat, 08 Nov 2008 02:52:51 +0000 http://www.kipesquire.net/?p=7073#comment-7830 >>"The court must hold that California may not issue licenses to non-gay couples because if it does it would be violating the equal protection clause," Allred said at a news conference."<< http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-gaylegal6-2008nov06,0,5471913.story I know its not the actual filing, but as I said, I'm not a lawyer so making my way through the labyrinth of legal websites in not my forte. >>"The court must hold that California may not issue licenses to non-gay couples because if it does it would be violating the equal protection clause," Allred said at a news conference."<<

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-gaylegal6-2008nov06,0,5471913.story

I know its not the actual filing, but as I said, I'm not a lawyer so making my way through the labyrinth of legal websites in not my forte.

]]> By: Chuck http://www.kipesquire.net/2008/11/on-the-petition-to-overturn-proposition-8/comment-page-1/#comment-7829 Chuck Sat, 08 Nov 2008 00:43:24 +0000 http://www.kipesquire.net/?p=7073#comment-7829 Doc Grumpus - I think the court opened the door to exactly that form of attack by holding that authorizing same-sex marriages was not their only option after finding that the discrimination violated equal protection. They did an analysis of why they preferred expanding marriage to eliminating it, but clearly did not hold that was their only option. Haven't seen the filing you refer to though. Do you have a cite or a link to a copy of the petition? Doc Grumpus – I think the court opened the door to exactly that form of attack by holding that authorizing same-sex marriages was not their only option after finding that the discrimination violated equal protection. They did an analysis of why they preferred expanding marriage to eliminating it, but clearly did not hold that was their only option. Haven't seen the filing you refer to though. Do you have a cite or a link to a copy of the petition?

]]> By: The Crossed Pond » The Legal Challenge to Proposition 8 http://www.kipesquire.net/2008/11/on-the-petition-to-overturn-proposition-8/comment-page-1/#comment-7828 The Crossed Pond » The Legal Challenge to Proposition 8 Sat, 08 Nov 2008 00:40:13 +0000 http://www.kipesquire.net/?p=7073#comment-7828 [...] County of Riverside, 140 Cal. App. 3d 900, 906 & nn.3-5.” So no block quotes for them. Kip, on the other hand, summarizes the issues nicely, and my eyes did not glaze over nearly as much in reading his post: [...] [...] County of Riverside, 140 Cal. App. 3d 900, 906 & nn.3-5." So no block quotes for them. Kip, on the other hand, summarizes the issues nicely, and my eyes did not glaze over nearly as much in reading his post: [...]

]]> By: Dr. Grumpus http://www.kipesquire.net/2008/11/on-the-petition-to-overturn-proposition-8/comment-page-1/#comment-7825 Dr. Grumpus Fri, 07 Nov 2008 22:30:22 +0000 http://www.kipesquire.net/?p=7073#comment-7825 Kip, Referencing your previous post on this, there was, obviously, one other demographic that voted in favor of Prop 8: The 65+ age group. They voted in favor of it 61%/39%, I believe. The 18-29 age group voted against by the same percentages. I take some (although very little) solice in knowing that one attitude is growing in number, whereas the other is shrinking at a rate of some 40K a year (IIRC). Again, not much to hearten anyone who recognizes the bigotry, but there it is. Don't fear the reaper? But I wanted your opinion on the other lawsuit that has been filed, asking the State Supreme Court to stop issuing marriage licenses across the board since it violates the equal protection clause. Given the previous ruling that there is no legal basis for discriminating between same-sex and different-sex marriages, isn't it a slam-dunk that the court simply says, in effect, "OK, the amendment has passed, we accept it, and now we have only one way to square this circle: California no longer provides marriages, and it is civil unions for everyone." I can't see how they could <i>not</i> rule that way, but I ain't no lawyer. Kip,

Referencing your previous post on this, there was, obviously, one other demographic that voted in favor of Prop 8: The 65+ age group. They voted in favor of it 61%/39%, I believe. The 18-29 age group voted against by the same percentages. I take some (although very little) solice in knowing that one attitude is growing in number, whereas the other is shrinking at a rate of some 40K a year (IIRC).

Again, not much to hearten anyone who recognizes the bigotry, but there it is. Don't fear the reaper?

But I wanted your opinion on the other lawsuit that has been filed, asking the State Supreme Court to stop issuing marriage licenses across the board since it violates the equal protection clause. Given the previous ruling that there is no legal basis for discriminating between same-sex and different-sex marriages, isn't it a slam-dunk that the court simply says, in effect, "OK, the amendment has passed, we accept it, and now we have only one way to square this circle: California no longer provides marriages, and it is civil unions for everyone."

I can't see how they could not rule that way, but I ain't no lawyer.

]]>