Source: San Francisco Chronicle, Los Angeles Times, AFP
SAN FRANCISCO -- The state Supreme Court, which in May determined that marriage is a fundamental right available to gay and lesbian couples, plunged back into the same-sex marriage wars today, agreeing to decide the legality of a ballot measure that repealed the right of gay and lesbian couples to wed in California.
At the urging of both sponsors and opponents of Proposition 8, the justices voted 6-1 to grant review of lawsuits challenging the Nov. 4 initiative, with Justice Joyce Kennard dissenting, according to San Francisco Chronicle.
However, the court refused, 6-1, to let same-sex marriages resume while it considers Prop. 8's constitutionality. Justice Carlos Moreno cast the dissenting vote, San Francisco Chronicle reports.
Meeting in closed session, the justices asked for written arguments to be submitted by Jan. 21. The court could hold a hearing as early as March, with a ruling due 90 days later, San Francisco Chronicle reports.
The court also signaled its intention to decide the fate of existing same-sex marriages, according to the LA Times, asking litigants to argue that question.
"This is a great day for the rule of law and for the voters of California," Andrew Pugno, attorney for Protect Marriage, Prop. 8's sponsoring group, is quoted saying by San Francisco Chronicle.
Protect Marriage won permission from the court today to intervene in the case, according to the Chronicle. Pugno said he was confident the measure will be upheld and was particularly pleased that the court allowed it to remain in effect while the lawsuits are argued.
If the court had dismissed the suits, they could have been refiled in a county Superior Court, where most cases begin. They could still have reached the state's high court, but only after lengthy appeals.
"We could have been looking, easily, at two or three years of litigating this issue" if the court had denied review, said Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights and a lawyer for same-sex couples in one of the suits. "It's a great relief that the court recognizes the importance of resolving this quickly."
In a result that has provoked nationwide protest by gay rights activists, Californians approved a proposal in November 4 polls which amended the state constitution to recognize only marriages between men and women, AFP recounts.
The passage of the measure triggered lawsuits from activists, right groups and city officials who argue that Proposition 8 represented a sweeping revision of the constitution and was more far-reaching than a simple amendment.
Opponents of Prop. 8 argue that it is a revision because it deprives a historically persecuted minority of fundamental rights and leaves courts powerless to intervene. A ruling upholding the measure would leave any minority group vulnerable to repeal of its rights by majority vote, the lawsuits argue, according to the Chronicle.
"Equal protection of the laws is not merely the cornerstone of the California Constitution, it is what separates constitutional democracy from mob rule tyranny," San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera said, according to AFP.
Challenges were filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Center for Lesbian Rights, and Lambda Legal while San Francisco, Los Angeles, Santa Clara, and 8 other cities and counties have sued in a joint bid.
The court's previous rulings on similar lawsuits have been mixed, according to Los Angeles Times. The court has upheld at least six initiatives and rejected only two that were challenged as illegal revisions.
Although the court tends to defer to voter sentiment on initiative challenges, it has overturned popular ballot measures in the past, LA Times reports.
In 1966, the California Supreme Court struck down an initiative that would have permitted racial discrimination in housing. Voters had approved the measure, a repeal of a fair housing law, by a 2-to-1 margin. Opponents challenged it on equal protection grounds, not as a constitutional revision.
Supporters of Proposition 8 have threatened to mount a recall of any justice who votes to overturn the measure, the Times reports. The court's members serve 12-year terms and appear on the ballot unopposed in retention elections.
Source: State Supreme Court to hear challenges to Prop. 8 | San Francisco Chronicle
Prop. 8 gay marriage ban goes to Supreme Court | Los Angeles Times
California court will hear challenges to gay marriage ban | AFP