California Gay Marriage on Hold as Case Is Appealed

New York Times ^ | August 16, 2010 | Jesse McKinley

[lbryce]

A federal appeals court has extended a stay on same-sex marriages in California until it decides whether a ban on such unions is constitutional.

It is just the latest turn in a protracted legal battle over Proposition 8, the voter-approved ban.

The ruling, issued by a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, came less than a week after a federal district judge, Vaughn R. Walker, lifted a stay he had imposed to allow proponents of the ban to argue why same-sex marriages should not proceed. On Aug. 4, Judge Walker ruled that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional.

Even when lifting his stay on Thursday, Judge Walker allowed six days for the Ninth Circuit to review his ruling. That left many gay and lesbian couples and their supporters hopeful that same-sex marriages would resume Wednesday at 5 p.m., when Judge Walker’s stay would have expired.

That will not happen. Now, such weddings will not resume until, at least, the appeals court decides the case. And perhaps not until it is decided by the United States Supreme Court, where it seems to be headed.

The Ninth Circuit panel, made up of Judges Edward Leavy, Michael Daly Hawkins and Sidney R. Thomas, determined that a stay pending the appeal was appropriate.

The panel requested the first briefs to be filed in September and for the appeal to be heard in court in December.

Richard L. Hasen, a professor of law at the Loyola Law School Los Angeles, said the ruling “takes the heat off the Supreme Court,” which was likely to have been asked for an emergency stay by those who support Proposition 8 if the Ninth Circuit had not acted.

[lbryce]

Seems Such a Shame! All They Want is To Have Their Union Legalized!(Like The Longhoremen at the docks.) Now, All Honeymoon Plans Are
Shelved Indefinitely. Boo-Hoo!

[Persevero]

And they say it isn’t a mental disorder. Honestly.

[lbryce]

They’re practicing “going down the aisle” wedding rehearsals
if,when it’s all legalized again soon.

[Persevero]

“They’re practicing “going down the aisle” wedding rehearsals
if,when it’s all legalized again soon.”

Yes, and if you refuse to cater it, you’ll be guilty of discrimination!

These four messed up people can legally adopt, too. God have mercy.

[Maelstorm]

If you haven’t already visited it:

http://www.zombietime.com/

[lbryce]

The Old Testament calls homosexuality is “an abomination unto God”.

[lbryce]

The Old Testament calls homosexuality is “an abomination unto God”.

[Recovering_Democrat]

Frankly, this should've been thrown OUT of the court after 10 minutes: "This is an issue for the state of California to decide. Next case, please." That statement should have sufficed.

I am a little pissed off that this has even been picked up by the federal courts--the federal courts should recognize it isn't in their jurisdiction. By continuing with such nonsense, the people of California are (I don't know the legal term) by defacto abdicating all their rights to some Federal Judiciary.

[Mojave]

Usurpation.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Maybe the adults will be in charge after all.

[Hoodat]

If current California marriage law is temporarily deemed unconstitutional, then the privileges and immunities of said unconstitutional law should be restricted, not expanded. There is no legal basis for a judge to expand the reach of a law that he/she deems to be unconstitutional. If current law is wrong, then abolish it. The state shall sanction no marriages at all. That's the only way to guarantee equal protection condition for all.