BREAKING NEWS:
(11-17) 16:42 PST SAN FRANCISCO -- The likelihood of a final California Supreme Court showdown over same-sex marriage increased dramatically Monday when Attorney General Jerry Brown and the pro-Proposition 8 campaign urged the justices to decide whether the voter-approved ballot measure is constitutional.
Both Brown, the state government's top lawyer, and the Protect Marriage campaign organization plan to defend Prop. 8, which would write a ban on same-sex marriage into the state Constitution. In separate filings Monday, the liberal attorney general and the conservative sponsors of the initiative gave similar reasons for asking the court to review lawsuits filed by the measure's opponents.
Read the rest here ... and remember that part about it not being over 'til the fat lady sings!
8 comments:
This couldn't have more drama if gay men wrote the script!
Of course, they wouldn't write it exactly this way, but then again, it wouldn't have THIS drama, fer sure.
Sweet baby Jesus and all the angles that sing him to sleep at night! Except, of course, for the fat lady angel. She's waiting "in the wings" until justice is done and then, she'll sing, "Alleluia!"
Prayers continue to ascend.
My understanding is Brown OPPOSES Proposition 8 and SUPPORTS the right to marry. Why doesn't he, on behalf of the State of California, just stipulate to the relief requested and file a Statement of Non-Opposition to the Writ Petition? That is simple and clean and it's over and done.
David,
Beats me!
He's contemplating running for Gov. in 2010; maybe he thinks he needs to run as a "moderate".
I presume that Brown, as AG, has an obligation to defend the validity of California acts and bills regardless of his personal views. Otherwise, why would a liberal AG be doing this?
Is this the former Governor or the son of the former Governor?
This is "Governor Moonbeam" himself!
:-)
Jerry Brown is both former Gov *AND* son of former Gov.
And yes, as AG he's legally obligated to defend Prop H8 as "the Law of the Land", regardless of his personal beliefs (Sucks to be him . . . especially, in light of??? ;-X)
jcf, I could make a credible argument that Brown was under no obligation whatsoever to "defend" Prop Hate or to oppose a motion for a stay. The argument here is that the Proposition was not properly approved, therefore, one could argue that until those questions are resolved, it isn't "law" yet.
I expect the worst. Our experience is that the haters win.
I really feel deeply violated, I can 't begin to explain how much. Instead of getting used to to all this, it's like an awful, agonizing worm eating at my insides and it's getting worse.
And the arguments about the validity our marriage? DEEPLY DEEPLY dehumanizing. A court deciding whether we are married or not, over our protests--like we are imbeciles, or slaves.
DEEPLY disturbing.
Post a Comment