Skip to comments.Not So Fast: Prop 8 is Still California Law
Posted on 06/27/2013 8:59:31 AM PDT by ColdOne
click here to read article
The EmeMedia’s rush to mischaracterize this decision should send a shudder down the spine of every thinking American. This proves that they are firmly on the side of anarchy and lies.
What a tangled web they weave when first they start to adjudicate.
What the court did here was rule that malfeasance/misfeasance/nonfeasance on the part of these rulers is a-ok: that is, essentially, what they have said here.
The question is why? And it has an easy answer: Proposition 8 was [and is] completely valid as an amendment to California's Constitution — that the governor and AG are required to see that the laws are upheld and
faithfully executed is, apparently, irrelevant — moreover, this ruling effectively strips people of the right to petition the federal government when a State is violating the 14th Amendment (after all, only the government has standing).
Looks like the HISSY FITS won’t end for a while.
The really disturbing thing is the decision is all in favor of tyranny — a simple `yes` or `no` would have been infinitely better, but by rejecting standing they've effectively said that only the government can challenge laws.
Seems to me if the SCOTUS refuses to decide on an appeal then the lower court ruling would stand. This is confusing.
The fact that those were gone by midday told me that the Gay Mob wasn't sure whether the other decision was good news or bad as far as they were concerned.
If we're this lost that we just get opinions from the "news" media instead of facts, we're as good as an anarchist state.
But that means Prop 8 is still the law in California. Section 3.5 of the California Constitution specifically commands:
An administrative agency ... has no power:
(a) To declare a statute unenforceable, or refuse to enforce a statute, on the basis of it being unconstitutional unless an appellate court has made a determination that such statute is unconstitutional;
(b) To declare a statute unconstitutional;
(c) To declare a statute unenforceable, or to refuse to enforce a statute on the basis that federal law or federal regulations prohibit the enforcement of such statute unless an appellate court has made a determination that the enforcement of such statute is prohibited by federal law or federal regulations.
Here's a comment following the article:
The 9th cant. They've been voided. Walker ruling is the only other one, It did not overturn Prop 8, it only issued a temporary injunction. ... , only an Appeals court can revoke a State constitutional amendment. The Supremes knew this when they issued their ruling in both cases.
So it was an appeal from Walker's temporary injunction that went to the USSC?
Banning homosexual marriage at this point will literally take an Act of God and the possibility of an Act of God should not be dismissed.
I see what they are saying. The Calif Constitution requires an “Appelate” court to have ruled it’s unconstitutional. Otherwise the California Executive has no authority to treat it as unconstitutional. It’s insufficient under the California Consitution for a District court to rule it unconstitutional.
Therefore if California officials don’t appeal the District Court’s ruling and get an appellate court ruling, the officials will violate the California Constitution by accepting the District Court’s ruling.
It sets up an interesting conflict of authority. One I think the District Court would win.
Californians would have grounds for impeachment for failure to seek an appellate court ruling. Unfortunately That and a quarter won’t get them a cup of coffee.
The bottom line is Jerry Brown screwed his own citizens by refusing to defend their vote in court.
LOL- I hope this is true
Mark Levin nailed this one. They handed it back to be picked apart by the lower courts, based on their central finding that “you have to be a bigot in order to oppose gay marriage”.
Levin said this was “written by very clever law clerks” to destroy Prop 8. while keeping SCOTUS fingerprints off of that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.