Perry v. Schwarzenegger, aka the Proposition 8 Trial, will be argued on appeal today starting at 10:00 AM Pacific Time in front of a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit court in San Francisco, California.
This diary is offered for running commentary as you watch or listen to or follow the tweets about the hearing. I will update as well with any compelling commentary from other sites I am keeping tabs on.
Live Streaming:
Liveblog:
12:48 Boies excellent. Olson pretty good, but lost it a couple of times. Cooper did a plausible job of arguing a weak position. SF attorney rocked. Imperial county attorney complete loser.
Judges asked reasonable questions.
I'd give us a 2/3rds chance of prevailing on some level at this point. Just a complete guess.
12:46 Cooper: Romer was incredibly broad; does not apply here. And we're done.
12:41 Cooper back. Baker again. Back to the procreation argument again. That's their whole argument, and I don't see how it stands.
12:38 Judge Smith does not like SF attorney.
12:36 "Procreate in some different way..." "Association of gays with marriage 'taints' the institution. Not allowed."
12:33 San Francisco attorney up. "Completely irrational. Parenting and child-rearing regulated completely differently. Prop 8 has nothing to do with children." Judge: "Label?" "Yes, but an important label."
12:32 Olson scores! "Why draw the line as California did?" No rational reason.
12:28 Olson: "California built a fence around marriage". Gays denied access in California.
12:20 Smith: "Marriage vs. domestic partnerships." Olson: remedy doesn't fit the problem.
12:16 Olson rambling.
12:12 Olson: "Lawrence combined with marriage cases" is authoritative.
Crawford is shit irrelevant.
12:09: Reinhart: Asking same thing again. Answering again: "Romer is binding".
12:04: Reinhart: "Do we have to concede the US Constitution gives a right to same-sex marriage?" Boies: "No, Romer is binding."
12:02 Olson up. It does make a difference if you take away a right. That's what the US Supreme Court has said.
12:00 Did Cooper just say it should be decided by heightened scrutiny? Oh boy, "Orwellian methods to police fertility".
11:55 Cooper making no sense answering Smith. Smith: "Trying to find rational basis for California's decision in Prop 8." Here we go: 'natural procreative ability of men and women'.
11:48 Reinhart: "What is the point of taking away ((only)) the title?"
11:42: Cooper: "invalidated traditional marriage" ???
11:36: The Crawford case? Never heard of that before.
11:34: Hawkins: "How is Prop. 8 different than Romer?" "Did Prop 8 or did it not take away a right?"
11:30: Wow. Unintentional pregnancies. This is the crux of their argument! Smith asking "what is the rational basis of just a word, 'marriage'? Zing. Cooper making no sense here in his answer. "The name of marriage is essentially the instution."
11:27: Here we go: "naturally produce children". Wow. He's really arguing that marriage is only a concern when two people can reproduce.
11:23: Cooper up again. Hasn't said 'sanctity' yet. Zing! Re-instituting segregation? This is awesome!! Judge: "How is this different?"
11:22: And we're off.
11:17: Announcement, court will resume shortly!
11:15: Boies' basic argument: regardless of all this crap about clerks, and propositions and who can defend, the US Supreme Court has made it absolutely clear multiple times that these yo-yos intervenors do not have standing on appeal.
11:08: Ten minute recess. Now on to the merits.
11:05: Cooper back. Cites Strauss vs. Horton as precedent allowing standing via New Jersey case.
11;02 "personalized, concrete, and particularized injury" again.
10:56: Boies sure knows his stuff. Defends against standing very well.
10:48 Boies holding up well against some tricky issues.
10:38: Wow, what a mess.
10:30: Boies now up. Judges are trying to trip him up but he seems to be holding up.
10:25: Judge: "When you don't know the answer, just say so!"
10:20: A twisty maze of passages, all different. WTF knows what they are arguing about? Statutory officers, enjoined, blah, blah.
10:17: This guy is getting creamed. Need recs or this diary will die long before the hearing is over.
10:14: Imperial County making its argument for standing. Not going well within seconds.
10:07: Asking why defendants didn't try to compel the Attorney General to defend.
10:03: Judge cites Arizona case immediately as argument against standing.
Cooper says "I have no case supporting standing"...
10:00: It starts on time! Cooper (for the defense) speaks.
9:57: California Channel has a view of the inside of the courthouse up.
9:46 Prop 8 Trial Tracker: There are only three people seated in the audience section behind the defendant-intervenor side, whereas our side is almost full.
9:45: The President is speaking on CSPAN3 at the moment.
Background Information:
Other Information: