In Perry v. Schwarzenegger, U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker has found that Proposition 8 violated the federal constitutional rights of gays and lesbians to marry the partners of their choice. While this is undoubtedly the first step in successive legal battles over this issue, the unlikely team of Ted Olsen and David Boies is proving to be a formidable foe of those who wish to deny marriage equality.
Readers can get a copy of the final ruling here, but the main thrust of it comes in the remedy section:
Plaintiffs have demonstrated by overwhelming evidence that Proposition 8 violates their due process and equal protection rights and that they will continue to suffer these constitutional violations until state officials cease enforcement of Proposition 8. California is able to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, as it has already issued 18,000 marriage licenses to same-sex couples and has not suffered any demonstrated harm as a result,see FF 64-66; moreover, California officials have chosen not to defend Proposition 8 in these proceedings.
Because Proposition 8 is unconstitutional under both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses, the court orders entry of judgment permanently enjoining its enforcement; prohibiting the official defendants from applying or enforcing Proposition 8 and directing the official defendants that all persons under their control or supervision shall not apply or enforce Proposition 8. The clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment without bond in favor of plaintiffs and plaintiff-intervenors and against defendants and defendant-intervenors pursuant to FRCP 58.
There is sure to be more analysis as people get a chance to digest the details. Feel free to note your feelings and opinions here in the mean time.
Congratulations!
Hat Tip: GoodAsYou
a thousand huzzah’s for this decision!!!
Perry v Schwarzenegger will be for same sex couples the same way Loving v Virginia was in 1967(!) for interracial couples!
DOMA and its bastard children in the states will be going down! Whether it be in 2010, 2011, or 2012 — Judge Walker has written one of the bast arguments *ever* for same-sex marriage, and the rights of LGBT folks across the country!!
Say goodbye to DOMA!!
When I heard CBC describe yesterday morning exactly what had to be done for the Prop 8 side to win–prove their claims that orientation is not fixed, that gays make bad parents, that gay marriage is a threat to straight marriage–I thought, No way can they do this. Glad to see I was right.
What I don’t get is how the same-sex marriage ban can be squared with freedom of expression. Considering how just about every political fight boils down to the Constitution and the First Amendment, I’m amazed how short-sighted–or just hypocritical–anti-gays are when it comes to gay rights. Isn’t the freedom to say, “I do,” pretty fundamental?
Yes, Dave, that’s true. But you have to realize that the perverted mindset of the religious reicht is the fact they have this perverted belief that they and only they have the right to dictate morality.
They’re also under the delusion that their religious opposition to same-sex marriage is far superior to civil law because of their vastly superior devotion to their god. It’s why they’re labeled as the American Taliban or Talabangelicals, because their goal is exactly the same as those Muslim fanatics — a dogmatic, totalitarian theocracy.
This is why the religious reicht is so angry at Judge Walker — they expected him to blindly rule in their favor because of their piousness and their divine superiority. When he ruled that their religious opinions have no standing in civil court, they’re now attacking the messenger by demanding he be impeached, primarily because Judge Walker’s gay, and thus automatically is in conflict of interest — not that this stopped other conservative activists!
That’s MNSHO as to why the religious reicht are the way they are.
The full text of the decision is available here (and likely at a few other sites). It’s fascinating! (Not joking; the so-called “evidence” on the pro-Prop. 8 side is just plain nonsensical.)
Dave R, I think you’ll like the way the judge’s decision is framed (final pages of doc).