SCOTUS may say one thing, but there’s no telling what California’s court will do.
Since Prop 8 is an amendment to the state constitution, it may be overturned only if it conflicts with a higher law. The only law higher is the US Constitution, and in that, the only clause that may be applicable is the Ex Post Facto clause. The California court could declare that voiding the “marriages” legally entered into before Prop 8 passed amounts to a punishment of the persons involved.
I don’t see how the courts could overturn Prop 8 completely, but then again I also don’t see how the 4th Amendment guarantees the right to kill a baby.
True
The California court could declare that voiding the “marriages” legally entered into before Prop 8 passed amounts to a punishment of the persons involved.
If they did that the only imagined "punishment" would originate from the SCOC ruling last may that permitted homosexual marriages. At that time the SCOC knew the issue had qualified for the Nov ballot. I happen to catch some of Ken Starr's Prop 8 oral arguments and I could clearly tell some of the SCOC did not like the blame putting on them.
Starr used the precedence of polygamist marriages being declared null and void which is a fact the SCOC cannot ignore.
I don’t see how the courts could overturn Prop 8 completely, but then again I also don’t see how the 4th Amendment guarantees the right to kill a baby.
Nor do I, but I understand Ginsburg finds the right to kill a baby in the 14th's "Liberty" clause.
Bizzare.