Prop 8: Same-Sex Marriages Delayed At Least Six More Days
Andrew Cohen
Legal Analyst
Posted:
08/12/10
The federal judge in California who last week struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban ruled Thursday that local officials there still do not have the legal authority to marry same-sex couples for at least six more days.
In an 11-page order, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker denied a request by supporters of Proposition 8 to keep the marriage ban in place pending their appeal of his landmark 136-page ruling. But at the same time, the veteran judge, an appointee of both Ronald Reagan and the first President George Bush, gave same-sex marriage opponents six days, to the end of business on Aug. 18, to seek appellate relief from his latest order.
The practical effect of this new ruling, then, is to shift the scene of the next court battle to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, where lawyers for Prop 8 will seek to save the ballot initiative, for now, and at the same time block the renewal of same-sex marriages in California for what could be several years. But if the appeals court rules against them, same-sex marriages can resume next Thursday.
The lawyers who challenged Prop 8 applauded Walker's latest ruling.
"The overwhelming evidence at trial established beyond any doubt that Proposition 8 denies gay men and lesbians the fundamental right to marry and treats them unequally, without any rational basis for doing so, and that it causes them irreparable and immediate harm," said Theodore B. Olson, who together with David Boies led the legal team in this lawsuit. "The court's decision today recognizes that there is no reason to delay allowing gay men and lesbians to enjoy the same rights that virtually all other citizens already enjoy."
If Walker's ruling created another legal hurdle for opponents of same-sex marriage, it did not entirely satisfy Prop 8 foes, who had hoped the judge would clear the way for the immediate resumption of same-sex marriage in California.
Those marriages were halted in 2008 in the wake of the passage of Prop 8 -- and they currently remain in a sort of legal limbo. The Republican governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and the state's attorney general, Jerry Brown, both told Walker that California could handle new same-sex marriages. But with supporters of same-sex marriage cheering in the streets and with gay and lesbian couples prepared to promptly seek marriage licenses from local clerks, Walker punted the matter to his appeals court bosses.
As he did last week in declaring the 2008 measure unconstitutional, Walker noted on Thursday afternoon the lack of evidence offered by same-sex marriage opponents, who had sought to delay his order resuming the marriages.
"Proponents had a full opportunity to provide evidence in support of their position and nevertheless failed to present even one credible witness on the government interest in Proposition 8, " he wrote. "Based on the trial record, which establishes that Proposition 8 violates plaintiffs' equal protection and due process rights, the court cannot conclude that proponents have shown a likelihood of success on appeal," which would warrant a stay.
If and when it receives an appeal from Prop 8's supporters in the next few days, the 9th Circuit will face many of the same initial questions presented to Walker. A three-judge panel of federal appeals judges -- chosen at random -- will first have to determine whether opponents of same-sex marriage have established the legal elements necessary to stay the enforcement of Walker's order. Any ruling by the 9th Circuit could be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In an 11-page order, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker denied a request by supporters of Proposition 8 to keep the marriage ban in place pending their appeal of his landmark 136-page ruling. But at the same time, the veteran judge, an appointee of both Ronald Reagan and the first President George Bush, gave same-sex marriage opponents six days, to the end of business on Aug. 18, to seek appellate relief from his latest order.
The practical effect of this new ruling, then, is to shift the scene of the next court battle to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, where lawyers for Prop 8 will seek to save the ballot initiative, for now, and at the same time block the renewal of same-sex marriages in California for what could be several years. But if the appeals court rules against them, same-sex marriages can resume next Thursday.
The lawyers who challenged Prop 8 applauded Walker's latest ruling."The overwhelming evidence at trial established beyond any doubt that Proposition 8 denies gay men and lesbians the fundamental right to marry and treats them unequally, without any rational basis for doing so, and that it causes them irreparable and immediate harm," said Theodore B. Olson, who together with David Boies led the legal team in this lawsuit. "The court's decision today recognizes that there is no reason to delay allowing gay men and lesbians to enjoy the same rights that virtually all other citizens already enjoy."
If Walker's ruling created another legal hurdle for opponents of same-sex marriage, it did not entirely satisfy Prop 8 foes, who had hoped the judge would clear the way for the immediate resumption of same-sex marriage in California.
Those marriages were halted in 2008 in the wake of the passage of Prop 8 -- and they currently remain in a sort of legal limbo. The Republican governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and the state's attorney general, Jerry Brown, both told Walker that California could handle new same-sex marriages. But with supporters of same-sex marriage cheering in the streets and with gay and lesbian couples prepared to promptly seek marriage licenses from local clerks, Walker punted the matter to his appeals court bosses.
As he did last week in declaring the 2008 measure unconstitutional, Walker noted on Thursday afternoon the lack of evidence offered by same-sex marriage opponents, who had sought to delay his order resuming the marriages.
"Proponents had a full opportunity to provide evidence in support of their position and nevertheless failed to present even one credible witness on the government interest in Proposition 8, " he wrote. "Based on the trial record, which establishes that Proposition 8 violates plaintiffs' equal protection and due process rights, the court cannot conclude that proponents have shown a likelihood of success on appeal," which would warrant a stay.
If and when it receives an appeal from Prop 8's supporters in the next few days, the 9th Circuit will face many of the same initial questions presented to Walker. A three-judge panel of federal appeals judges -- chosen at random -- will first have to determine whether opponents of same-sex marriage have established the legal elements necessary to stay the enforcement of Walker's order. Any ruling by the 9th Circuit could be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.