Skip to main content

View Diary: Prop 8 Struck Down: The Decision (376 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Hmmm. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Killer of Sacred Cows

    Here's the thing.

    One of the complexities in this case is that the California Supreme Court first said that it was part of California's own constitutional law to require it. Then the voters took it away. That latter fact is what's being challenged.

    So, we're back to the status quo ante where In re marriages is in effect. If that latter had never occurred, this case would be slightly different and the order issued at the end would be too, no?

    Obviously, a precedent would be set, but would it not have to be a different case with a different controversy to, say, apply the facts here to, say, Utah?

    I'm all for it being universal. I'm just wondering if these distinguishing features don't (a) reduce the intensity of the blowback in other (red) states, and (b) blunt the impact of this, and (c) make instituting gay marriage elsewhere even more high stakes, since this means, in effect, you can never go back.

    I'm just speculating. But I think this case is ripe for distinctions with its heavily fact-intensive and procedural-history rich stance.

    All I've got is an orange blog, three paragraphs, and the truth.

    by Attorney at Arms on Wed Aug 04, 2010 at 06:45:46 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (132)
  • Community (53)
  • Baltimore (45)
  • Bernie Sanders (36)
  • Civil Rights (35)
  • Culture (25)
  • Freddie Gray (21)
  • Elections (20)
  • Racism (20)
  • Education (20)
  • Hillary Clinton (19)
  • Law (19)
  • Economy (18)
  • Labor (17)
  • Politics (16)
  • Rescued (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Texas (14)
  • Media (14)
  • Environment (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site