Prop 8 Supporters STILL Trying to Stop Gay Marriage in California

Good grief, you guys, unclench and just forget it! Not only did you lose--repeatedly--you have suffered no harm. Gay people have resumed marrying each other in California, and life has gone on as before. And now, you're just embarrassing yourselves, and hurting your (dubious) cause.

[Excerpt]

Prop 8 Authors Ask California Supreme Court To Stop Same-Sex Marriages 

Proposition 8 has been dead for less than a month, and already, its advocates are trying to honor its memory by asking the California Supreme Court to order county clerks to stop issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples. They contend that governor Jerry Brown lacked the authority to put an end to the enforcement of Prop 8, since a provision in the California constitution prohibits officials from refusing to enforce a law unless an appellate court has first determined that said law is unconstitutional. . .

Read more: Towleroad

The Gay Thing: Supreme Court Denies Bid to Halt California Marriages

I've returned from a wonderful weekend in Palm Springs, celebrating my 5-year wedding anniversary to The Other Half. It was great to revisit the place of our marriage, and especially sweet to do so when same-sex marriage had been ruled legal again in California. But I've been a bit out of the loop on the happenings in the news.

When I saw via Twitter that the proponents of Proposition 8 was appalled and aghast that marriages had resumed on Friday, I experienced several feelings. Elation that weddings would resume while we were there. Happiness that this ridiculously protracted battle was over. Eye-rolling bemusement that this group would still not give up. And anger that even with the highest court in the land shutting them down, the National Organization for Marriage and their ilk are still obsessed with trying to squash my rights.

But schadenfreude is my overriding emotion. Especially now that the Supreme Court has thrown up a final--final--barrier. NOM has lost California. From now on, they can huff, and they can puff, but they are done. And it portends an eventual right to 50-state marriage, particularly when coupled with the DOMA decision that gives Federal recognition to married couples in some states, but not others. I'd very much like to confine my future responses to this question exactly as Nancy Pelosi responded to a question about Michele Bachmann's statements on the issue: "Who cares?" But that wouldn't fill much of a blog post, would it?

[Excerpt]

Supreme Court rejects bid to halt same-sex marriages in California

The Supreme Court rejected an emergency request to stop same-sex marriages in California, a lawyer for the gay couples who sued said Sunday. Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., one of the lawyers who challenged Proposition 8, said that he had just received word from the court Sunday morning that Justice Anthony M. Kennedy denied a request by ProtectMarriage, the sponsors of Proposition 8, to halt the marriages. . .

Read more at: Los Angeles Times

The Gay Thing: California, Here We Come!

We planned, long ago, to "return to the scene of the crime," and revisit Palm Springs on our fifth wedding anniversary. We got married a couple of weeks after same-sex marriage was legalized in June 2008. In November of that year, Proposition 8--sponsored largely by outside monies gathered in conjunction with the Catholic and Mormon Churches--passed on the same night Barack Obama was elected President. That was a paradoxical occurrence, one seemingly perfectly timed. The Prop 8 backers couldn't have known it, but that year was likely the very last time they could muster a majority vote against gay marriage in California.

Five long years have passed since that brief sunny period when same-sex couples could marry in California. At first, we were thrown into legal limbo. After some legal procedures we found out that stay that way, not that the Prop 8ers didn't try to annul us--they did. Next, there was a lawsuit against the state which resulted in throwing out Prop 8 as un-Constitutional, but wait! Can't let them just repeal it, no-no. A stay was placed, and appeal filed. . . and then an appeals court that concurred. . .then another stay. . .and then THE SUPREMES!

See, religious objectors? Not married in church, but at this
awesome city hall in Palm Springs. No Jesus, no "holy
matrimony." So, chill out.

Prop 8 had been legally drafted and voted upon (there had been procedural questions), and the 18,000 couples who had already married got to

For people like me who followed all of this, it was a long, aggravating slog. At all points along the way, and in internet message boards, Twitter, Facebook and elsewhere, we were subjected to homophobic idiots, all spewing the same loads of crap that failed in court. Worse, most "pro-traditional marriage" types seemed to have very little understanding of what the case entailed, though they think they know everything about "the homosexual lifestyle." Following that stuff is just a hideous, awful, viper's nest.

A lot of that is gloriously, fantastically over with. Of course, haters go'n hate, and there will still be spewing of nonsense. But it will be easier to let that stuff just roll off now.  California marriage equality will resume after a pointless, expensive interlude. I take great pleasure in knowing that the combined homophobic forces like National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and their affiliates spent millions and millions of dollars, and got nothing. This is my message to all of these busybody, Gladys Kravitzes. . .

So what does the death of Proposition 8, and the gutting of the badly named Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) mean for gay people? Well, it's not all 100% clear yet.  If you're legally married and reside within a state that recognizes it, you're good as gold, as married as married can be to all relevant government bodies and entities. If you're like me, and were married in a state that does recognize it, but live in one that doesn't, it's less clear, though it seems like we'll be able to have federal recognition, but not state.

I'm willing to bet that very, very soon, there will be several lawsuits over this very issue, and will very likely be won under the "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution. The question is this: will it have to be done in each of the 37 states that don't recognize it, or with SCOTUS step in again?

At this point, I don't care about all of that. We got a huge win in this, regardless of whatever spin you hear. NOM lost; straight up lost. And that makes me very happy.

The Gay Thing: WE WIN!!!

The (always badly named) Defense of Marriage Act has been declared un-Constitutional by the Supreme Court! And the California Proposition 8 case was dismissed on lack of standing by the defense, meaning the lower court ruling stands, and same-sex marriages are going to be legal again in California. WOOHOOO!!!

Ramifications will be come clearer throughout the day, much more to come later. For now, back to work.

The Gay Thing: SCOTUS Watch (DOMA & Prop 8 Decisions Due)

For the past few weeks, there have been a whole lot of people waiting with bated breath for the Supreme Court to issue their rulings on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) case, and the California Proposition 8 case, both with huge ramifications for gay rights and marriage equality. All along, many court-watching professionals have indicated they thought the decisions wouldn't come down until the last week of the session, perhaps even on the very last day of it.

New tungsten carbide/carbon fiber wedding bands
for the anniversary!

Still, each recent Monday, there have been many with crossed fingers awaiting a decision, only to be disappointed. And then Thursdays--apparently a bonus decision day irregularly added--there has been another trickle of news, but nothing on the gay stuff. All through this, I've been aware that the last day of the Court's calendar is June 27, which happens to be the 5th anniversary of my same-sex marriage in California! Which seems as much like fate or kismet as an atheist like me is comfortable with. Now, it is possible that the decisions will come down today, or even be split between today and Thursday. But I have a hunch they're coming down--both of them--on my anniversary. I'm hopeful that whenever it happens, it is good news. And as we are going to be back in Palm Springs where we were married on our actual anniversary, it would be pretty cool to have a favorable verdict on both cases.

Watch this space.

PS: Oh, and hey, to any tech-savvy robbers out there, we've got a house sitter, so just forget it, alright? Cool.

Rhode Island 10th State (Plus DC) with Legal Marriage Equality

Get a room, you guys! Kidding. . .
Image from Huffington Post

Yes, the gay just keeps hitting the news cycle, and thus, the blog. Of course at this point, any regular readers have got to be used to it, or have already left, right? Anyway, it's worth pointing out that Rhode Island is the final state in New England to legalize same-sex marriage, rounding out 10 states in the union (in addition to Washington, DC), bit is actually the eleventh state to actually do it. California--where I was married to The Other Half in 2008--took it away in the same year, after it was already legal. That will ultimately be decided by SCOTUS in June, potentially putting the count back to 11+1. Counting the District of Columbia, that would put marriage equality at 23.5% of the country. One more state--Delaware, Illinois, Minnesota, all possibilities--will put it over 25%. As my favorite blogger Joe.My.God. is fond of saying: "Zoom, zoom, zoom!"

[Excerpt]

Rhode Island Legalizes Gay Marriage

Rhode Island became the tenth U.S. state to legalize same-sex marriage Thursday with a 56-15 vote.
Just before he signed the legislation into law, Gov. Lincoln Chafee took to the steps of the Rhode Island State House, where he told a jubilant crowd, "Today we are making history ... we are living up to the ideals of our founder. . ." 

Read more at: Huffington Post

60 Best Signs Against DOMA and Prop. 8

As I said in the previous post, there are going to be a lot of gay posts and stories, not just here, but all over the internets for the next few days. But I have always been as much about frivolity as I am about serious matters, so here is one that will tickle your funny bone, and make you think. There's some great stuff here!

(Click these to embiggen)

See them all at: BuzzFeed

The Internets Go Gay for a Day (Or Two?)

I know what you've been thinking, if you've been online much today. Something like this:

Am I right? Yes, on any given day, unless you're a very sheltered person, you may be confronted with gay stories and subject matter in a variety of places. But because of the two very high profile cases before the Supreme Court--California's Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act--gay stuff is suddenly everywhere. And I have one thing to say to anyone who is overwhelmed or offended by the spectacle:

Suck it up! Now you know how gay people feel! Every day is straight people day, and we learn to live with it. Seriously though, you don't have to put up with it on this scale every day, so just keep calm, and carry on. And if you're still asking yourself the question, "why do the gays want to get married anyway?" I have another entertaining piece of video to show you that explains everything.

Oh and by the way? I'm not done with the subject by a long shot, so if you arrived here and don't like it? Come back in a few days, okay? On second thought, don't come back.

Anti-Gay Parenting Study Was Manipulated to Influence SCOTUS

The now infamous Mark Regnerus,

from ThinkProgress

The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) is a badly named group dedicated to the sole purpose of preventing marriages: those of gay people. They purport to be only about "protecting marriage"--the word itself, and/or the concept, and/or "holy matrimony"--but the more you follow them, the more evident their real mission is. They want to prevent gay people from being seen as equal in society. It's about far more than marriage, but they realize that once that is achieved, the rest of the battle for them is lost. Particularly now, with support surging for marriage equality.

Because other arguments have failed, NOM and their affiliated groups have latched onto the argument that marriage is for children, and the natural bio-mom, bio-dad, 2.5-child nuclear family. Period. Though this very argument has failed pretty spectacularly in court, they've decided this is their best hope, and they've put all of their effort into pushing it. Amazingly enough, a study came out that actually made their argument seem stronger, by painting the parenting skills of gay couples as suspect.

Surprising no one who has been paying attention, the study has been found to be not at all what they claimed it to be. So, while NOM and their attendant groups claim to have a Biblical case against marriage equality, they seem to have no problem whatsoever with bearing false witness. And to the Supreme Court, no less.

[Excerpt]

Documents Reveal Anti-Gay Parenting Study Was Manipulated To Influence Supreme Court

Mark Regnerus has admitted his “family structures” study didn’t actually measure gay parenting, comparing the children of separated parents who had same-sex relationships with those of married opposite-sex parents. An internal auditor of the journal that published the Regnerus study last year concluded its findings were “bullshit” because this false comparison doesn’t adequately measure same-sex parenting. . .

Read more at: Think Progress

Democratic Congress Members Sign on to Strike Down DOMA

Image from Towleroad

The Supreme Court will have a lot of incentive from some high wattage names to back up a decision to strike California's Proposition 8, as well as the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). They just keep pouring in, the latest being from 212 Democratic members of Congress. Sure, there are naysayers and busybodies sending in their briefs to retain both Prop 8 and DOMA, but I don't think (or hope) that they'll be as persuasive. The good guys are calling for tolerance, equality and justice. The bad guys are calling for the right to continue discriminating, to prevent people from having equal rights, and to base law on religion. If SCOTUS upholds either DOMA or Prop 8, it will be a sign that politics ultimately trumps the Constitution and fair play. And it will be a very sad day for America. Crossing my fingers that it doesn't end that way.

[Excerpt]

212 Democratic Members of Congress Ask Supreme Court to Strike Down DOMA: BRIEF

212 Democratic members of Congress led by Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) including all seven out LGBT members and some who voted for DOMA in 1996 have asked the Supreme Court to strike it down in a brief submitted today in the Edith Windsor case. . .

Read more: Towleroad

More Than 75 Prominent Republicans Rebuke Prop 8

So, Meg Whitman is now an ally?
Weird. Image from Towleroad.

Yes, two stories about the gay in a row. But hey, it's in the news! This one is particularly interesting. Though I'm not sure I agree with the reasoning of this group of Republicans, this is a case where the ends justify the means: major GOPers on the record against Proposition 8, the referendum that struck down same-sex marriage in California (after it was already legal).

I'm half of one of the 18,000+ couples who were married in California in 2008, and though my marriage is "grandfathered," it is still in something of a limbo, a "pocket universe," or something. The Supreme Court could--should, dare I say--strike Prop. 8 down this spring.  Though that may only affect California, it's possible that it could cause the dominoes to fall, particularly if they also strike down all or part of DOMA. Fingers crossed. . .

[Excerpt]

75+ Prominent Republicans Sign Brief Urging Supreme Court to Strike Down Proposition 8

More than 75 current and former GOP elected officials including former Reagan and Bush cabinet members, former governors, and key GOP consultants and strategists have signed on to an amicus brief to be filed on Thursday urging the Supreme Court to strike down Proposition 8. . .

Read more: Towleroad

SCOTUS Takes Two Gay Marriage Cases

Image from ABCNews

Oy. I'm a gay blogger who is actually half of a gay-married-in-California couple, and I'm plugged into the politics of marriage equality. I even get updates to my phone if a scintilla of homo news crosses the newswires! But even I don't know what to make of Friday's announcement from the Supreme Court.

SCOTUS is taking up two cases of more than 10 before them related to same-sex marriage rights. One of them is the one most famously known as Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the case that overturned California's Proposition 8. Prop 8 reversed a California Supreme Court ruling that allowed gay couples to wed--including me--in California during a brief window in 2008. Three court decisions have now affirmed that Prop 8 was unconstitutional, and therefore invalid. A stay has been placed all of this time, disallowing any further same-sex marriages in the state.

Well, the busybodies who put Prop 8 on the ballot in the first place are a tenacious bunch. Who knows what in the world drives them to be so involved in something that concerns them in no way whatsoever. But they have been appealing this up, up, up all the way to the Supremes, though they've been losing all the way. The key worry is that this happens to be pretty much the most conservative SCOTUS in history. Will they rule this case on the merits--and if so, I could relax--or will they go arch-right-wing? Will they use pretzel logic, as they do when they allow God on the money and in the Pledge of Allegiance? Or will this case finally be settled in marriage equality's favor five years after it began? We'll know in June.

We'll also find out how the case against the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) goes. That one, I'm fairly certain will go our way. DOMA has lost case after case in several courts. Just about the only thing the Supremes would have to hang their robes on (assuming they'd want to keep DOMA intact) would be the recent Nevada decision, which ruled my state's marriage ban* constitutional. Otherwise, unless they do deep logic backflips, they pretty much have to kill at least part of DOMA. And good riddance.

My marriage license from California
(Blurred to protect the innocent!)

In any event, may I say--as a taxpaying, law-abiding citizen--that I'm sick and tired. I'm offended. I'm angry, and I'm indignant. Why? Because I shouldn't have to beg for equal rights. My life, my husband's life, and our lives together shouldn't be subject to the whims of ignorant bigots or uninformed voters. We shouldn't be a "wedge issue." And we shouldn't have this long delayed slog through the courts, and be kept on pins and needles for months and years on end. I want this to end, and I want equality to win. Let the busybodies stick their prudish, superstitious, illogical noses into somebody else's business.

[Excerpt]

Supreme Court Will Hear Same-Sex Marriage Cases

The Supreme Court plunged into the contentious issue of gay marriage Friday when it agreed to take up California's ban on same-sex unions and a separate dispute about federal benefits for legally married gay couples. . . 

Read more at: ABC News

*The Nevada marriage ban is especially galling, since I was here for both votes (two are required to change the Nevada State Constitution). A human-shaped turd named Richard Ziser--in cahoots with radio personality Alan Stock--managed to convince the voters of Nevada that our state believes in "the sanctity of marriage." Now, forget that "sanctity" is a religious concept, not a state one. No, more important is that this is Nevada we're talking about. As I've said before, we're the state of quickie marriages (Britney Spears, for example), quickie divorces, drive-thru wedding chapels, Elvis impersonator "preachers" and the Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire game show, where the prize was a rich husband! "Disingenuous" is the most charitable description of the entire campaign. They won, but only because it was one of the early efforts, and the gay community here is to amorphous. Fortunately, Ziser's political aspirations didn't pan out. And Stock hasn't exactly become a household name.

Proposition 8 Knocked Down Again

Image from source, LA Times

Yesterday was all about Scott Walker, and he (and all of the other recall targets) inexplicably retained their seats. I never said I understood Wisconsin, or why toady politicians often get eternally re-elected. But that's not all that was going on in the news. The California "Proposition 8" battle logged another loss for the proponents.

I have a personal stake in the case, being one-half of one of the 18,000 same-sex couples who were married in California in the brief months in which it was legal. My marriage remains legal, in a weird grandfathered pocket, but no same-sex couples have been allowed to marry since November 2008, when Proposition 8 was passed. Since then, Proposition 8 was put to a legal challenge, and lost badly. Seriously, the defense was comically bad. And then that was appealed.

And appealed again. Along the way, it was whittled down to a very narrow "California only" decision, meaning that even if it goes to the Supreme Court, it would likely only deal with California, not the entire country. Which is fortunate if the Supremes are inclined to rule in favor of Prop 8 (and thus against gay couples), or a delay if they rule against (and might have made marriage equality national). I personally believe that an unbiased, un-politically motivated court would rule in favor of marriage equality, on the legal merits. But we know that the SCOTUS does not operate in a political vacuum. And I don't want to test this court unnecessarily. After Citizens United, who could trust them?

[Excerpt]


Proposition 8 same-sex marriage fight headed to U.S. Supreme Court

California's legal battle over same-sex nuptials is now headed to the U.S. Supreme Court, the final chapter in four years of litigation over the constitutionality of Proposition 8's ban on gay marriage. . .

Read more at: Los Angeles Times

In Case You Missed It: 8

Dustin Lance Black's play, 8, the dramatization of the California Proposition 8 trial. If you don't know, Prop. 8 was the amendment to the state constitution that struck down same-sex marriage rights, which had been in existence for several months. The play was performed this past weekend, and stars George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Christine Lahti, George Takei, Yeardly Smith, Matt Bomer, Matthew Morrison, Jane Lynch, Martin Sheen and many more. It's worth your time. Oh, and Kevin Bacon! Which makes your 6 Degrees of Kevin Bacon game even easier.

Incidentally, having now watched the entire show, it occurs to me to tell you something. I followed this case with great interest, through The Courage Campaign. You might think that the comedic moments (best embodied by John C. Reilly and George Takei) were dramatic license. The characterizations might have been, but this is the way it really went down. Those were their words. When Kevin Bacon as the defense lawyer said, "we don't need evidence" and "I don't know," the lawyer really did say that. This is why the pro-marriage equality side is so confident in Judge Walker's decision. Ted Olson and David Bois quite simply demolished the defense. They were so good, but might not have had to be, given the weekness of the other side!

California's Proposition 8 Declared Unconstitutional. Again.

Image from source, LA Times

There was good news today, if you are a proponent--as I am--of marriage equality. In California, the 9th Circuit Court has upheld the unconstitutionality of Proposition 8, the referrendum that repealed same-sex marriage. In 31 states at last count, laws and state constitutional amendments have been put to a vote and passed. It is unfortunate that we don't have a loud and clear enough voice saying, "We don't put rights to a vote in this country!" Or, maybe even simpler, "Hey, how would you like it if we voted on your marriage?" 

Anyway, I'm already legally married in California (having done it when it was legal), so this ruling doesn't affect me personally. And people who missed that window can't run out and do it yet. The pro-Prop 8 ass clowns (sorry, that's as nice as I'll be about them) will attempt to appeal this, probably to the Supreme Court. But SCOTUS doesn't have to take the case, and if they do, there's still a good chance Prop 8 will still be thrown out. I'm optimistic.

[Excerpt]


Prop. 8: Gay-marriage ban unconstitutional, court rules


A federal appeals court Tuesday struck down California's ban on same-sex marriage, clearing the way for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on gay marriage as early as next year.
The 2-1 decision by a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot measure that limited marriage to one man and one woman, violated the U.S. Constitution. The architects of Prop. 8 have vowed to appeal. . .


Read more at: Los Angeles Times

Decision Tuesday on California's Proposition 8

Image from source, Towleroad

I am half of one of the 18,000 same-sex couples who were married in California during the brief time that it was legal. When Proposition 8 sadly passed (on the same night President Obama was elected), my marriage was in limbo. The resolution put a stop to legal "gay marriage," but it did not undo ours. This created an odd situation, where you have legally married same-sex couples, and other couples who cannot get married. Add to this the questionable wisdom of voting on civil rights, and particularly to remove rights by vote, and you had a nasty mess.


When Proposition 8 was challenged in court, the anti-gay, pro-Prop 8 crowd had their chance to argue their case. Despite all of the money that the Mormon Church (and some Catholics and evangelicals) had to come up with A+ material, they fell flat on their faces. Their material was all but laughed out of court. If you haven't read the transcripts, do yourself a favor. The standard arguments, "it isn't natural," "marriage is to make babies," and others were demolished. So, Prop 8 supporters had egg on their faces when their efforts were struck down.


That was two years ago. Appeals and legal wrangling have frustrated gay rights supporters for all of that time. But our waiting is over. At least for this latest stage. But what does it all mean? For that, you don't need me, you need an expert. So. . .


[Excerpt]

The Ninth Circuit's Prop 8 Ruling: What To Expect Tomorrow?

 The Ninth Circuit will issue a much-anticipated opinion in the Prop 8 case, Perry v. Brown, tomorrow. Avid readers of Towleroad will remember that we have followed this case closely every step of the way (including here, here, here, here, here, and here). For a quick refresher, MetroWeekly's Chris Geidner has a helpful summary of where we've been to date. Today, I would like to preview the decision, answer some questions, and prepare us for the momentous events of tomorrow.

Read more at: Towleroad

Breaking News: New York State Legalizes Same-sex Marriage

Coincidentally, Gay Pride is in New York for the weekend. Party!
And that guy looks disturbingly like my brother. Photo from HuffPo

We now have a sixth state (in addition to Washington DC) that has passed marriage equality for same-sex couples. And for that, I and many other people in the country are very, very excited. I'll be happier when the Prop 8 case is finally finished, and other same-sex couples can join The Other Half and myself as legally wed in California. And I'll be even happier if we overturn DOMA, and my hedonistic state of Nevada has to drop its very ironic "protection of marriage" constitutional amendment. For once it seems more likely.

But then, how long until one of those misnamed "Family" organizations tries for repeal, or a New York constitutional amendment?

[Excerpt]

NY Senate passes gay-marriage bill

New York state senators Friday night voted 33-29 to legalize gay marriage, a breakthrough victory for the gay-rights movement in the state where it got its start.


The vote came after a veteran Republican senator earlier told The Associated Press he would vote yes, apparently giving the measure the support it needs to become law. . .

Read more at: MSNBC

Prop. 8 Judge Didn't Have to Disclose His Sexuality. So There.

Image from source, LA Times

At first blush, when it was disclosed that Judge Vaughn Walker--the guy who decided the California Proposition 8 anti-gay marriage ballot initiative was invalid--was gay, it seemed like bad news. "Oh, dear! Why, he should have recused himself!" was the right-wing response, and a response didn't come instantaneously from me. But after only a moment of thought, I realized that it was a red herring. Gay, straight, whatever, the case impacts all citizens who might want to marry (or prevent people from marrying, sick as that is), so the sexuality of the judge is irrelevant.

But they tried anyway. As with trying to declare that Barack Obama was born in Kenya, the conservatives are trying to win this on a technicality. And as with the birther nonsense, this one didn't fly either.

[Excerpt]

Gay jurist in Proposition 8 case had no legal obligation to remove himself, judge rules [Updated]

A federal judge on Tuesday refused to invalidate last year's ruling against Proposition 8, deciding the gay jurist who overturned the same-sex marriage ban had no obligation to step aside because of a possible conflict of interest. . .

Read more at: Los Angeles Times

AFER Explains Prop 8 Ruling

Today, there was another step in the Perry vs. Schwarzenegger California Proposition 8 case. Basically, it sounds like the federal court is deferring to the California court for some clarification. Curiously, this has gotten little attention, probably because it is kind of unclear. To help clarify, here is a recording by American Foundation for Equal rights with the principals of the anti-Prop 8 side of the case, including Ted Olson.



Found at: Joe.My.God.

California's Proposition 8 Could Be On Its Way Out

Image from source, SFGate

As one half of one of the 18,000 same-sex couples who married in California in 2008, I say it's about time. I am dismayed--though I understand--that the ruling may only apply to the state of California. A broader ruling would be preferred, so that my marriage might be recognized in my home state of Nevada. But I get why this sometimes has to go in baby steps. It'll still be valid in New York, Connecticut, Iowa, Washington D.C., New Hampshire and of course, California. Eventually, I'm confident, we'll actually be equal all across the country.

[Excerpt]

Appeals court hints at narrow Prop. 8 ruling



The federal appeals court in the Proposition 8 case hinted Monday at a ruling that would allow gays and lesbians to marry in California while leaving other states' laws intact - a restrained approach seemingly designed to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. . .


Read more at: SFGate