Has the CA Supreme Court already said they'd throw out Prop 8?

[BR_Parkway]

Unless there's another way to interpret this from their earlier historic, but very clearly written decision

From Page 6 of the May 15, 2008 decision:

"..under this state's Constitution, the constitutionally based right to marry properly must be understood to encompass the core set of basic substantive legal rights and attributes traditionally associated with marriage that are so integral to an individual's liberty and personal autonomy that they may not be eliminated or abrogated by the Legislature or by the electorate through the statutory initiative process."

http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocServer/Marriage_Ruling.pdf?docID=3001

edited Title

[LeftyMom]

1. Prop 8 was a constitutional amendment, not a statutory initiative.

The bolded comment is a rejection of the prop the ruling invalidated, prop 22.

[lapfog_1]

2. And someone should be on the case to charge

the rules (via another constitutional amendment) so that a simple majority is insufficient to change the constitution.

And pass THAT ballot measure right AFTER another is passed that rescinds Prop 8.

[LeftyMom]

4. They really should.

Unfortunately, it's a very difficult sell to get voters to take power away from themselves.

[BR_Parkway]

5. Isn't the current argument of the briefs filed that it was a statutory initiative

(simple majority) that should have required a full Constitutional Amendment (2/3's?)

[LeftyMom]

7. The issue is if it's a constitutional amendment (simple majority) or a revision (2/3)

It's definitely not a statutory initiative, because that's what 22 was, and it was overturned, which is why they wanted to change the state constitution so badly.

[Joe the Liberal]

3. If they throw it out.....

Then all the churches and religious organizations who spent millions on trying to pass it will have spent that money for nothing. :rofl:

[BR_Parkway]

6. Daddy Dobson might have to lay off another 20% of his professional

hate mongering staff.