Although the media hype that yesterday's Supreme Court ruling means same-sex "marriage" is back in California, it's NOT. Yes, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling was negated, leaving in place the (lower) district court ruling by the openly homosexual Judge Vaughn R. Walker favoring same-sex "marriage," but still the traditional marriage Proposition 8 remains in effect.
It sounds like complicated legalese, but it's easily explained; read on . . .
For background, read California Same-sex 'Marriage' Ruling by Biased Judge and also read Homosexual Judge Walker Says Children Don't Need Parents as well as Supreme Court Favors California Defenders of Marriage
UPDATE 6/29/13: 9th Circuit gives immediate green light, short-circuiting legal process
-- From "Court to wait to make move on same-sex marriage in California" by Lisa Leff, Associated Press 6/27/13
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said backers of Proposition 8 — the state ban on gay marriages — have [at least 25 days] to ask the Supreme court to rehear the case.
The San Francisco-based court said it may continue to bar gay marriages even beyond that time if proponents of Prop 8 ask for a rehearing.
The Supreme Court’s ruling earlier in the day cleared the way for same-sex marriages to resume, but sidestepped the larger question of whether banning gay marriage is unconstitutional.
The justices voted 5-4 to let stand a trial court’s August 2010 ruling that overturned the state’s voter-approved gay marriage ban, holding that the coalition of religious conservative groups that qualified Prop 8 for the ballot did not have authority to defend it after state officials refused to do so.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "What's next for California after Prop. 8 case dismissed" by Stephanie Condon, CBS News 6/26/13
. . . one of the proponents of Prop. 8 suggested the same-sex marriage ban remained in place. "We remain committed to the continued enforcement of Prop. 8 until there is a statewide order saying otherwise," Andy Pugno of the Prop. 8 Legal Defense Fund said outside the court Wednesday.
In dismissing the case, the Supreme Court nullified the appeals court decision in Hollingsworth v. Perry, leaving in place just the district court decision. Even though the district court found Prop. 8 unconstitutional, district courts are typically not able to issue statewide injunctions against a law. That means if left up to conservative interpretation, the district ruling would only apply to the two gay couples who brought the case to court. The rest of California's same-sex couples would be out of luck.
Proponents of Prop. 8 argue that state officials should be obligated to defend and enforce a law directly approved by voters. After all, Prop. 8 passed with 52 percent support in California in 2008 - on the same day Californians helped elect President Obama.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 6/29/13: From "Appeals court OKS same-sex marriages to resume in Calif., prompting Friday flurry of weddings" by The Associated Press
. . . a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a brief order Friday afternoon dissolving a stay it had imposed on gay marriages while the lawsuit challenging the ban advanced through the courts.
The [Supreme Court] said, however, that it would not finalize its ruling “at least” until after the 25 days the ban’s backers have under the court’s rules to seek a rehearing. The 9th Circuit was widely expected to wait until the Supreme Court’s judgment was official before clearing the way for same-sex marriages to start again.
“The resumption of same-sex marriage this day has been obtained by illegitimate means. If our opponents rejoice in achieving their goal in a dishonorable fashion, they should be ashamed,” said Andy Pugno, general counsel for a coalition of religious conservative groups that sponsored the 2008 ballot measure.
“It remains to be seen whether the fight can go on, but either way, it is a disgraceful day for California,” he said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 6/29/13: From "Flood of gay marriages expected this weekend in California" By Maura Dolan and Rong-Gong Lin II, Los Angeles Times
In a surprise action, a federal appeals court cleared the way, bypassing a normal waiting period and lifting a hold on a trial judge's order that declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional.
"It is part and parcel of the utter lawlessness in which this whole case has been prosecuted, said Chapman Law professor John Eastman, a supporter of Proposition 8. "Normally, courts let the parties kind of pursue their legal remedies before they issue a mandate."
"Tonight it is chaos and lawlessness, and anyone who is concerned about the rule of law ought to be deeply troubled by what happened here," the constitutional law professor said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Study: Media Bias FOR "Gay Marriage" is Christians' Fault as well as TV's Disproportionate Attention to the Gay Agenda
