Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

December-22-08

Proposition 8 Legal Battles Intensify with Briefings Filed with CA Supreme Court

California Attorney General Jerry Brown made public his opposition to Proposition 8 Friday in a brief to the California Supreme Court while "Yes on 8" forces filed a brief extending their opposition to include invalidation of the same-sex marriages already performed in there. California's Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality of Proposition 8, which eliminated same sex marriage in the state earlier this November. The proposition, which passed 52 percent to 48, overturned a May ruling of the state Supreme Court that legalized same sex marriage.

After Prop. 8's passage, Brown had initially said that he would support the measure, which bans same-sex marriage, as enacted by the voters, according to the L.A. Times. Brown revised his position in a statement that "Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification."

Also Friday, Prop. 8 supporters filed a brief with the state Supreme Court seeking to invalidate the 18,000 same-sex marriages performed before the ban passed in November. This brief, co-written by Kenneth Starr, known as the independent counsel who investigated Bill Clinton, states: "Proposition 8's brevity is matched by its clarity. There are no conditional clauses, exceptions, exemptions or exclusions....For this court to rule otherwise would be to tear asunder a lavish body of jurisprudence. That body of decisional law commands judges as servants of the people to bow to the will of those whom they serve even if the substantive result of what people have wrought in constitution-amending is deemed unenlightened," according to the Michigan Messenger. In his statement, Attorney General Brown indicated his belief that marriages entered into during the five months same-sex marriage was legal in California are valid irregardless of whether Proposition 8 is upheld.

Media Resources: Associated Press 12/20/08; Michigan Messenger 12/22/08; LA Times 12/19/08; CA Attorney General Statement 12/19/08; Feminist Daily Newswire 11/20/08


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

9/12/2014 Violence Against Women Act Turns 20 - Saturday will be the 20th Anniversary of the groundbreaking federal Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Passed in 1994, VAWA was the first piece of federal legislation to specifically address domestic violence and sexual assault as crimes and to provide federal funding to improve local response to violence against women, including training and resources for law enforcement and judges. President Barack Obama on Tuesday issued a proclamation commemorating the VAWA anniversary. . . .
 
9/12/2014 Indiana Woman Charged With Feticide For Premature Delivery - An Indiana woman has been charged with feticide after she delivered prematurely and sought hospital treatment. Purvi Patel, 33, sought help at an emergency room for vaginal bleeding where it was discovered that she had delivered prematurely at home. . . .
 
9/11/2014 Missouri Legislators Pass 72-Hour Abortion Waiting Period Law - Missouri legislators voted late last night to triple the state's current 24-hour waiting period to 72 hours, with no exceptions for rape or incest. Governor Jay Nixon previously vetoed the bill in July, calling it "extreme and disrespectful." Missouri's House voted 117-44 to override the veto, and then the Senate used a procedural move to stop a Democratic filibuster of the bill and vote 23-7 to complete the veto override Wednesday. "The only purpose of a 72-hour waiting period is to attempt to punish, shame, and demean women who have arrived at a personal decision that politicians happen to disagree with," said the president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights in a statement. . . .