Clearly the author missed the “uh, that is, unless it is like difficult or complicated, dude” clause.
“Clearly the author missed the ‘uh, that is, unless it is like difficult or complicated, dude’ clause.”
Nah, their case is that they are also required to uphold the U.S. Constitution (it’s actually mentioned first in the oath), and they believe that the California Constitution is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution on this issue. The judge agreed with them on this point. Thus, they argue that they are duty-bound to adhere to the higher authority of the U.S. Constitution and decline to defend the incompatible Prop 8.