Nature of Constitutional Change at Issue in Calif. Gay Marriage Ban Suits
Three petitions were filed in the California Supreme Court Wednesday challenging a voter-approved referendum banning gay marriage in the state.
At issue is whether the change is a simple amendment to the state Constitution that can be approved by a simple majority of the voters or a far-reaching revision requiring either a two-thirds vote of the legislature or a constitutional convention.
The Daily Journal (sub. req.) outlined the legal issue and quoted two law professors who said the California Supreme Court was unlikely to overturn the will of the voters. The court had ruled 4-3 in May that gays have a right to marry under the state constitution.
Chief Justice Ronald George, who wrote the majority opinion authorizing gay marriage, faces re-election in 2010. His opinion in a new challenge will place him “in a political vise,” the Recorder reports.
The amendment known as Proposition 8 was approved Tuesday by about 52 percent of the voters. It says, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
California Attorney General Jerry Brown plans to defend the proposition in court, as is the role of his office, the Daily Journal story says. But he adds that he will defend the marriages of some 18,000 same-sex couples who exchanged vows before voters approved the constitutional amendment, according to the Recorder.
Proposition 8 “did not say the measure was retroactive,” Brown said. But legal experts interviewed in the stories say the status of the marriages is unclear.
The San Francisco Chronicle and Los Angeles Times also covered the legal challenge to the ballot measure.
The Times story says gay-rights advocates are asking supporters to refrain from filing suit in federal courts for fear an adverse decision in the U.S. Supreme Court could set back the movement.
