Posted on 03/05/2009 8:31:22 AM PST by CounterCounterCulture
LIVE WEBCAST - 03/05/09
California Supreme Court Oral Arguments on Proposition 8 - Same Sex Marriage
9:00AM (PST)
The California Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Thursday, March 5, 2009, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., in three cases challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8, a statewide ballot initiative that was passed by a majority of California voters in November 2008.
The California Channel will broadcast this event live via your local cable provider and on our website*.
*Due to the high demand we expect for this event, if you have problems connecting then the server has reached its limit. Please try back later or watch the video in our archvie when it concludes.
Starr finishes. Rebuttals begin with Shannon Minter
Hard to tell. Kennard seems to be asking the plurality of questions and they generally had Jerry Brown’s toady on the ropes.
Kennard and George are clear votes to uphold prop eight. Their questions make it clear that they think this is an amendment, not a revision.
That is when I tuned in. He seemed to be floundering but I got a phone call and couldn't watch much of it.
I'm watching on the SacBee feed. In addition to seeing these dufuses, I have to look at Gloria Allred in her front row seat.
The other question which is harder to protect is how they rule on the homosexual marriages already performed.
Kennard’s retort to Theresa’s rebuttal makes me feel even better. Even though she doesn’t regret her prior concurrence on the May 15 ruling, she might actually go with the power of the poeple on the constitutional amendment we voted on.
Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.
Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.
Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.
Checkout: http://SilencingChristians.com
Who is the blonde (errrr) woman with the whiny voice that is now making a rebuttal?
“The matter is submitted and we are adjourned.”
Live video link Prop8
http://www.calchannel.com/images/tcc_live.html
Ellen Dwarfgeneres on speed
It’s over?
Yup. They were given three hours, and it wrapped up a little over three hours.
Now we await the decision. May not happen for weeks.
Ahhh... the irony. ;-)
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/03/prop-8-language.html
Proposition 8 rebuttal language coming back to haunt opponents
10:47 AM | March 5, 2009 California Supreme Court justices pointed out to opponents of Proposition 8 today that their rebuttal warning on the ballot initiative that a “yes” vote would deprive gay marriages of legal recognition “regardless of where or when performed” seemed to concede that the vote retroactively invalidated the 18,000 same-sex marriages.
BTW, even if Prop 8 is ruled valid and stands, opponents have already submitted an initative in which they’ll circulate and hope to qualify for the June 2010 election.
Where’s the replay video link ?
I missed the beginning. These comments are encouraging.
Of course, they already applied “excessive use of judicial power” in their first ruling (IMO).
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/03/california-just.html
State justices speak to people’s initiative power
11:18 AM | March 5, 2009
Justices of the California Supreme Court seemed reluctant today to override the will of the people as expressed by the narrow majority vote to effectively ban gay marriage with Proposition 8.
Before supporters of the November ballot measure even got their chance to speak to the court in San Francisco, the justices appeared to be warning Proposition 8 opponents that their arguments that the vote should be invalidated could be viewed as an excessive use of judicial power.
The state Constitution talks about “the great power of the people” and their right to amend the guiding principles, said Justice Joyce L. Kennard. “As judges, our power is very limited. We would like to hear from you why this court can willy-nilly disregard the will of the people to change the Constitution.”
Chief Justice Ronald M. George observed that the court’s decision on whether Proposition 8 deprives gay citizens of an inalienable right “is going to have implications for future efforts if everything that could conceivably be characterized as an inalienable right is outside the people’s initiative power.”
It’s seems absurd (of course, it’s California) that they could disqualify an iniative because voters don’t read all the rebuttals. What are we to do, ask them on polling day if they’ve read all the arguments for and against? That would be ruled a violation of election law.
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.