California Supreme Court Won't Immediately Stop Gay-Marriage

SF Gate ^ | 2/27/04 | David Kravets

[TatooChick]

The California Supreme Court declined a request Friday by Attorney General Bill Lockyer to immediately shut down San Francisco's gay weddings.

Lockyer had asked the high court to take the matter under urgent consideration, to instruct San Francisco officials to stop issuing same-sex marriage licenses and to nullify the more than 3,400 marriages already performed.

[TatooChick]

Heads Up Freepers!

Coming soon to a supreme court near you!

Now more than ever we need to get some conservatives in D.C.

Howard Kaloogian is running for the Senate in California. He opposes gay-marriage and is willing to use the U.S. Senate to remove "rouge activist" judges from the supreme court.

www.HowardForSenate.com

He initiated a recall of the AG over this mess. I hope he goes after every single member of the Supreme Court as well.

[TatooChick]

BAM!

[madprof98]

New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer refused to block the New Paltz ceremonies and did not issue an opinion on whether the marriages were legal. "The validity of the marriages and the legality of the mayor's action will be determined in due course in the courts," Spitzer said.

Another Great Liberal Hope, especially after he tried to put pro-life counseling centers In NY out of business. Not surprising he'd side with the gay-rights crowd on this.

[Betaille]

There you have it. The courts have struck down every attempt to defend marriage t hat has come to be. The ONLY alternative to gay marriage now is a constitutional amendment. What say you Tom Delay and John Kerry?

[tessalu]

It looks like John Doe may be left to uphold the law, when elected and appointed officials will not.

[Betaille]

"It looks like John Doe may be left to uphold the law"

This is a point that has to be explained to people. John Kerry can not claim to be against gay marriage, but at the same time oppose the only way of stopping it. Tom Delay needs to stop hiding behind false options also.

[Guillermo]

They always say they oppose activist judges, but they never actually do anything about it.

[Cicero]

So far, Bush has refrained from knuckling under and appointing lousy judges, as many of his predecessors did.

California is another matter. Regretably, Arnold is pro-abort and pro-gay rights.

I think this gay marriage thing may have been a step too far for the forces of liberalism. They have really stirred up a hornet's nest. More than they bargained for, I think.

[AntiGuv]

"rouge activist"

Tammy Faye Baker?

[Guillermo]

I'm not too sure about that.

Conservatives are cowering in their boots, while the Homofascists score victory after victory.

What was that movie, where one boy challenged the other boy: "Cross this line, and you're dead meat." So the other boy crossed the line, and the boy responded with moving the line, so on and so forth.

With each victory they get, the more they're viewed as "normal."

[Republic If You Can Keep It]

Lockyer, without taking a position on whether same-sex marriages should be deemed constitutional, told the justices it was a matter for the courts, not Newsom, to decide.

Maybe I don't understand what an Attorney General is supposed to do.

Why did he go to the Cal. Supreme Court at all?

Why didn't he just enforce the law by shutting down the illegal operation & arresting those responsible?

[Hotdog]

That's my question...

Can anyone answer that?

[cinFLA]

The California Supreme Court declined a request Friday by Attorney General Bill Lockyer to immediately shut down San Francisco's gay weddings.

Lockyer had asked the high court to take the matter under urgent consideration, to instruct San Francisco officials to stop issuing same-sex marriage licenses and to nullify the more than 3,400 marriages already performed.

Instead, the justices told the city and a conservative group that opposes gay marriages to file new legal briefs by March 5 in response to the attorney general's petition.

Locker has been under fire from every side since San Francisco, under a directive from Mayor Gavin Newsom, began issuing the marriage licenses two weeks ago.

Newsom sued the state last week on grounds that California's marriage laws -- which say a marriage is only between and man and a woman -- violate the state constitution's equal protection clause.

Pressure on Lockyer, a Democrat and the state's top law enforcer, intensified when Republican Schwarzenegger directed him to "take immediate steps" to halt San Francisco's marriage march.

Lockyer, without taking a position on whether same-sex marriages should be deemed constitutional, told the justices it was a matter for the courts, not Newsom, to decide.

"The genius of our legal system is in the orderly way our laws can be changed, by the Legislature or by a vote of the people through the initiative process, to reflect current wisdom or societal values," he wrote. "A law can be struck down by an appropriate tribunal if the law is determined, through our judicial process, to be inconsistent with basic rights or higher legal authority."

Regardless of the Friday order, the San Francisco-based Supreme Court did not indicate whether it would decide the issue. The seven justices usually are loath to decide cases until they work their way up through the lower courts, which this case has not.

"It's a matter of statewide concern and voters want to know, Californians want to know and couples that participated in ceremonies need to know the status of their relationship," Lockyer said in Anaheim on Friday.

Supporters of the marriages have criticized Lockyer for rushing the issue to the state's highest court, while opponents of same-sex marriages have criticized Lockyer for not acting sooner.

Dennis Herrera, San Francisco's city attorney, said Lockyer "makes an unconvincing case."

The rush to the altar by gay couples this month is rooted in a November decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, which ruled that prohibiting same-sex marriages violated that state's constitution. The court reaffirmed the decision this month, clearing the way for full-fledged gay marriages by mid-May.

Since Newsom enlisted city officials on Feb. 12 to begin performing gay weddings, other local officials have joined in -- a county clerk in New Mexico issued 26 licenses before that state's attorney general declared them invalid, and on Friday, a third front in the culture war opened when 21 gay couples exchanged vows on the village hall steps in New Paltz, N.Y.

"What we're witnessing in America today is the flowering of the largest civil rights movement the country's had in a generation," said New Paltz' Green Party mayor, Jason West.

New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer refused to block the New Paltz ceremonies and did not issue an opinion on whether the marriages were legal. "The validity of the marriages and the legality of the mayor's action will be determined in due course in the courts," Spitzer said.

Elsewhere in the country, gay and lesbian couples challenged local officials on the marriage issue. In Iowa City, Iowa, more than 30 gay and lesbian couples were denied marriage licenses by an openly lesbian county official who said she must uphold the law.

President Bush, citing the Massachusetts decision and the parade of weddings in San Francisco, backed a federal constitutional amendment Tuesday to bar such marriages. "A few judges and local authorities," Bush said, "are presuming to change the most fundamental institution of civilization."

In statehouses nationwide, lawmakers are scrutinizing their constitutions to see if they could be construed to permit same-sex marriages, even in states where laws now bar them. Massachusetts is one of many states where lawmakers are considering a state constitutional amendment to bar the marriages.

Lockyer said the court's action is urgently needed because thousands of newly married gays might otherwise think they enjoy the same rights granted other married couples -- such as the right to receive the other spouse's property in the absence of a will.

Already Friday, the Social Security Administration said it won't accept any licenses from San Francisco as proof of marriage until the questions are resolved.

"Until the issue of the legal validity of the licenses issued by San Francisco is resolved, thousands of holders of same-sex marriage licenses will remain in a foam of legal limbo," Lockyer wrote.

The California Supreme Court has a history of addressing marriage and gay rights cases. It was the first state high court in the nation to legalize interracial marriage 56 years ago. Twenty-five years ago, the court upheld gay rights by saying businesses could not arbitrarily discriminate against homosexuals.

The justices also have not indicated whether they would decide the merits of the petition filed Wednesday by the Alliance Defense Fund, an Arizona-based group that also wants the court to nullify all the weddings.

Lower court judges declined to immediately rule last week on the group's lawsuit, which asserts that Newsom does not have the authority to subvert California marital laws.

Meanwhile, Republican activists who helped mount the recall of former Gov. Gray Davis last year have announced plans to seek the removal of Lockyer, who they say has "neglected his duty" to enforce state marriage laws.

Lockyer denied that he was pressured by Schwarzenegger or derelict in his duties, saying he decided to intervene after the local courts failed to stop the marriages.

[Guillermo]

Because, he's for homosexual "marriage" and is playing "cya."

[newzjunkey]

I'm surprised but I can understand why they don't see this as requiring immediate action. This will work it's way through the courts. That's how it should be.

[JimSEA]

"What we're witnessing in America today is the flowering of the largest civil rights movement the country's had in a generation,"

I am sooooo tempted to say, "I'm out of here." and go. This is another "tar baby" issue. Half of the world's population actively wants us dead and we are messing with this crap. John Kerry is saying this:

"I don't fault George Bush for doing too much on the war on terror," Kerry told an audience at the University of California at Los Angeles. "I believe he's done too little. Where's he's acted, his doctrine of unilateral pre-emption has driven away our allies and cost us the support and critical cooperation of other nations. Iraq is in disarray with American troops still bogged down with no exit in sight."

All anyone wants to talk about is gay shack jobs. We got to take the BS and return it to the sewer. Security, the economy and education are what is actually important. Rant over.

[Drango]

Maybe I don't understand what an Attorney General is supposed to do. Why did he go to the Cal. Supreme Court at all? Why didn't he just enforce the law by shutting down the illegal operation & arresting those responsible?

OK, now I'm confused...The State Patrol reports to the governor. Why can't he enforce the law?

[Impeach98]

Thanks - Lockyer sucks. The California courts sucks.

I hope Howard wins so we can continue the political revolution we began with the Recall Gray Davis effort.