After a 3 week sabbatical for vacation, I am picking up blogging again on the same topic I ended with: The California Supreme Court and its defiance of the citizens of that state.
First, on June 2, the California Secretary of State, Debra Bowen, certified the California Marriage Protection Act for the November 2008 ballot. Of utmost importance, the Amendment to the California Constitution states: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” This means the Court MUST stay its May 15 decision. The people will now decide, as it should be.
Many same-sex marriage proponents were claiming majority opinions have changed in the state of California in the last two years since San Francisco Mayor, Gavin Newsom, saw his homosexual marriage certificates made illegal. However, A recent poll conducted on May 30, 2008 by ccAdvertising shows that 56% of California residents support marriage as one man and one woman. A poll a few weeks ago by the Los Angeles Times similarly revealed that 54% of those polled supported the Amendment and only 35% opposed it. So much for that theory.
Then, two days later on June 4, the California Supreme Court denied the Petition for Stay (pdf), filed by Liberty Counsel. The May 15 decision will become law on June 16, 2008.
Gay couples in California rushed to set wedding dates Wednesday after the California Supreme Court’s unusually quick rejection of challenges to its historic decision permitting same-sex couples to wed.
By rejecting petitions asking for reconsideration of the May 15 ruling, the court’s 4-3 vote removed the final obstacle to same-sex marriages starting on June 17. The court also refused to delay enforcement of the decision until after the November election, when voters will decide whether to reinstate a ban on same-sex nuptials.
The court’s decision to reject the appeals was unusually speedy. Petitions for rehearing, even those that are all but certain to be turned down, usually delay enforcement of rulings for 30 to 60 days.
This is nothing short of radical judicial activism at best, communism at worst. A handful of judges have just defied the will of the citizens of their state, trampled on their own laws, and violated the rights of millions of voters. Truthfully, this should not be surprising. After all, this decision was a gift from the court, according to the ACLU, and the court could not take it back once they gave it. That would be like taking a new toy from a child. Imagine the whining we would have to deal with.
Liberty Counsel is considering filing an appeal, but were unsuccessful in a previous appeal. If the decision becomes law, then it will be up to the voters. If the marriage amendment passes in November, it will nullify any marriage licenses [illegally] granted between June 16 and November 4.
Recent Comments