Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

State high court sets hearing on same-sex marriages for March 4
San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 2/6/8 | Bob Egelko

Posted on 02/06/2008 11:48:49 AM PST by SmithL

SAN FRANCISCO -- The California Supreme Court said today it will hear arguments over the state's ban on same-sex marriage next month in San Francisco.

A court scheduled a special three-hour hearing, three times as long as its usual sessions, for March 4 to consider lawsuits filed by the city of San Francisco and same-sex couples challenging the California law that defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman. A ruling is due within 90 days of the hearing.

The Legislature passed the law in 1977, and voters reaffirmed it in a 2000 ballot measure.

It was first challenged in February 2004 when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom ordered the city clerk to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Nearly 4,000 marriages were performed in the next month before the state Supreme Court called a halt.

The court nullified the weddings in August 2004 and ruled that Newsom had no authority to disregard the marriage law, but it did not decide whether the law was constitutional.

The case returned to San Francisco Superior Court, where Judge Richard Kramer ruled in 2005 that the law violated the fundamental right to marry the partner of one's choice and discriminated on the basis of sex.

A state appeals court overruled Kramer in October 2006, saying the law's exclusion of gays and lesbians from marriage could be justified by tradition and by the fact that domestic partners in California have most of the rights that married couples have. The state's high court then agreed to take up the case.

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: docket; homosexualagenda; ruling; samesexmarriage

1 posted on 02/06/2008 11:48:59 AM PST by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Again???

For crying out loud!!


2 posted on 02/06/2008 11:53:19 AM PST by TenthAmendmentChampion (Global warming is to Revelations as the theory of evolution is to Genesis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

“A state appeals court overruled Kramer in October 2006, saying the law’s exclusion of gays and lesbins from marriage could be justified by tradition...”

So, how many times are they going to rule on it? If the Supreme Court of CA upholds the decision of the appeals court, will they just go away? What do you think?


3 posted on 02/06/2008 11:54:08 AM PST by Froufrou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TenthAmendmentChampion

Just like them gays, they can never be satisfied unless they’re constantly poking the crap out of someone.


4 posted on 02/06/2008 12:01:59 PM PST by RSmithOpt (Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou

If the Supreme Court of CA upholds the decision of the appeals court, then they will turn to the legislature to pass the gender-neutral marriage bill that has been introduced by assemblyman Mark Leno. That bill actually passed the Calif. legislature twice, but was vetoed each time by Governor Arnold S.

If the Court rules in favor of gay marriage, then Calif. becomes just like Mass. in that regard.

Then, only a state constitutional amendment on marriage could overturn the court. California is probably too liberal a state for a marriage amendment to pass.


5 posted on 02/06/2008 12:04:03 PM PST by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

“California is probably too liberal a state for a marriage amendment to pass.”

Even liberals need to recognize the danger in setting up constitutional amendments like traffic cones.


6 posted on 02/06/2008 12:09:28 PM PST by Froufrou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

What part of “NO” don’t they get?


7 posted on 02/06/2008 12:16:34 PM PST by Not just another dumb blonde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Why don’t we just let judges decree laws? That’s what its coming down to. It absurd that they could one day wake up to find that a 30-year old law is now unconstitutional. Under such circumstances, how can one say that we live in a country that is governed by laws?


8 posted on 02/06/2008 12:23:57 PM PST by rbg81 (DRAIN THE SWAMP!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rbg81

still no mention of NY state legalizing homosexual marriages created in kanada.


9 posted on 02/06/2008 7:43:25 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TenthAmendmentChampion
How many times are they going to do this???

Haven't the people voted already?

An American Expat in Southeast Asia

10 posted on 02/06/2008 11:36:53 PM PST by expatguy (Write In and Support - John Bolton - For President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson