START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

Breaking: California Appeals Court Won’t Revisit Prop 8 Case

Breaking: California Appeals Court Won’t Revisit Prop 8 Case

The battle over gay marriage in California may be headed to the Supreme Court, after a federal appeals court announced on June 5  its refusal to reconsider its ruling striking down Proposition 8, California’s voter-approved gay-marriage ban.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit issued a brief order saying the same-sex marriage case failed to get the majority vote needed to convene a so-called “en banc” panel, which usually consists of 11 judges, in order to revisit a three-judge panel’s 2-1 decision declaring the voter-approved ban to be a violation of the civil rights of gays and lesbians in California.

The 9th Circuit does not often agree to rehear cases. Federal court rules reserve the practice for appeals that involve “a question of exceptional importance” or if the original decision appears to conflict with Supreme Court or 9th Circuit precedents.

Supporters Of The Ban Have 90 Days To Appeal To Supreme Court

As expected, supporters of the ban immediately said they would appeal to the high court. They will now have 90 days to ask the Supreme Court to overturn the appeals court’s earlier ruling. They have made clear they hope for a favorable response from the conservative-leaning court.

The top U.S. court could agree to hear the matter in the session beginning in October, putting it on track to decide the case within a year. It could also decline to review Prop 8, especially since this is strictly a California proposition, not designed to be a national mandate.

In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court would set national precedent if it decided to take the California case. Appeals courts have so far declined to rule broadly on whether marriage is a fundamental human right for same-sex couples as well as heterosexuals.

According to Politico, Ted Olson, a key lawyer for Proposition 8 challengers, said they will try to preserve the ruling for same-sex marriage rights in California by opposing the Supreme Court taking up the case. However, the former solicitor general didn’t sound averse to making a stand for same-sex marriage rights if the justices vote to take the case.

“It would be completely understandable and we would not try to avoid the full ventilation of those issues before the United States Supreme Court. We’d look forward to it,” Olson said on a conference call with reporters.

Olson said the justices would “probably take it or reject it sometime in the month of October.”

Is The Tide Turning In Favor Of Same-Sex Marriage?

While the Obama Administration could get pulled into the high-profile legal fight before November, it’s exceedingly unlikely the court would rule prior to the election. But justices are expected to start considering whether to take the case in the fall, just as the presidential election gets into high gear.

President Barack Obama last month turned gay marriage into a 2012 campaign issue, saying he believed same-sex couples should be able to marry. Republican Mitt Romney disagrees.

The vast majority of U.S. states limit marriage to opposite-sex couples, but the tide may be turning: polls show growing acceptance of same-sex nuptials, which have been legalized in eight states and the District of Columbia, thanks to votes by legislators and court decisions.

The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston last week ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutionally denied benefits to same-sex couples in a state where gay marriage was legal.

This is a good day for marriage equality!

Related Stories

Proposition 8 Supporters To Appeal To U.S. Supreme Court

BREAKING: 9th Circuit Rules Prop 8 Trial Tapes To Stay Sealed

Prop. 8 Tapes Case May Itself Be Recorded

Read more: , , , , , ,

Photo Credit: Lucio_V

quick poll

vote now!

Loading poll...

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it

37 comments

+ add your own
1:43AM PDT on Jun 9, 2012

Leslea H --- "...IF ANYONE is prevented from being equal under the law, NO ONE IS [equal]."

Thank you Leslea for putting everything so succinctly and so correctly!

People, take a page from the playbook of conservative Rabbis and recognise that circumstances change and people have to change along with them. Additionally, why, in a pluralistic society, should laws be made that favour one religious view over another? That is discrimination and that is the denial of 1st amendment rights to freedom of and from religion.

1:22PM PDT on Jun 7, 2012

Let people marry who they want and let's all MOVE ON!! There are far more important things to worry about.

11:57AM PDT on Jun 7, 2012

I made a video about why Homosexuals should have equal rights. It’s at my YouTube channel Zarrakan, and here’s the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdK5ETOJusw

Watch it, share it, and join the fight against the evil Homophobes.

7:40AM PDT on Jun 7, 2012

"And it blows my mind that you folks in the US, still don't comprehend that simple truth. IF ANYONE is prevented from being equal under the law, NO ONE IS."

Brilliant statement Leslea! If I could send you more stars this week I would! As a fellow Canadian, I boggle at the doomsdaying,fearmongering garbage which is spewed by those who seem to think that their rights are somehow being infringed upon if those same rights are shared by ALL.

This marriage thing shouldn't even in signify in anybody elses life but that of the couple who are getting married.

Grow up people - if it doesn't hurt you (which it doesn't) - then it's really none of your business.

5:41AM PDT on Jun 7, 2012

Thanks.

3:51AM PDT on Jun 7, 2012

Earnest R...We the people did vote on it in California.

8:39PM PDT on Jun 6, 2012

Why the hell are my rights up for debate?! Why can't we just grant equal marriage and let people bitch and moan?

8:16PM PDT on Jun 6, 2012

@ Sarah H.. “I don't think the courts should overturn the will of "we they people" First, we the people haven’t had the opportunity to vote on this issue. Second, the US was not set up as a democracy, with straight majority rule, but as a republic, in order to prevent the tyranny of the majority over the minority.



8:03PM PDT on Jun 6, 2012

@ Mark K.. “Rights do not require permits or assent... Rights simply exist” Not true. People have such rights as their culture recognizes. That is why every culture and every time period has different rights.

8:02PM PDT on Jun 6, 2012

@ Mark K.. “Rights do not require permits or assent... Rights simply exist” Not true. People have such rights as their culture recognizes. That is why every culture and every time period has different sets of rights.

add your comment



Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

ads keep care2 free
Story idea? Want to blog? Contact the editors!
ads keep care2 free



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.