Posted on 04/04/2005 2:14:01 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
Court Upholds California's Gay Partnership Law
11 minutes ago
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - An appeals court rejected on Monday a challenge to a California law that gives same-sex domestic partners many of the same rights as married couples.
The Alliance Defense Fund and other conservative groups brought the suit, arguing that a state measure on domestic partnership that became law in January was unconstitutional.
Their argument centered on a proposition approved by California voters in 2000 that defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
The Court of Appeal for the Third District in Sacramento backed a superior court judge's finding that the new law did not violate the 2000 Defense of Marriage Initiative.
"We conclude the trial judge was correct in ruling that the legislature's enactment of the domestic partners act did not constitute an amendment of the Defense of Marriage Initiative and, thus, that the legislature's action without separate voter approval did not violate ... the California Constitution," the court wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at story.news.yahoo.com ...
And this is exactly why civil unions and whatever else must be included in the wording of DOMAs and amendments.
Ammunition manufactured in 2005 will serve well in the coming elections. We should thank the courts this day.
What is this? You vote, it passes, they change it anyway....
Looks like the judges are at it again
Judicial activism in action. We need a U.S.Constitution Amendment stating marriage is between a man and a woman. That is the only thing that can beat judicial activism on this issue.
No, we don't need a Constitutional Amendment. What we need is to send a loud message to activist judges who regularly give the finger to voters, either by voting them out or....
Going to be hard on a life time appointment don't you think?
That's why I mentioned option #2.
Congress needs to start doing its Constitutional duty and impeach these bastards.
"What is this? You vote, it passes, they change it anyway...."
I do not agree that they changed anything. The vote was defining marriage as man and woman, the case was in regards to "same-sex partnership rights". Now, they clearly will not win this battle in California with so many liberal judges. I do not know a solution
This is the part I felt they were "changing". Not that it's held any water.
I agree, but it isn't going to happen. Congress will never take the courts on unless the courts start taking away all their perks and retirement. Then, just maybe, they might get upset. Look at the SCOTUS we have now. The majority of them were appointed by Republicans. Is anything going to change with the appointment of others under this administration? I doubt it.
Ask Humblegunner and Eaker what I am talking about...
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.