Same-Sex Marriage Update

Cyclopea · 08-16-2010, 05:48 PM

"First, and drastically most importantly, the Court granted the stay. Consequently the thousands of couples who were waiting for the day of equality will have to wait at least a few more months until December. It's interesting that the panel does not at all discuss the reasons for their decision on the motion to stay. That's because if they went through the factors, there's no way they could rationalize the stay. They themselves raise the issue of standing and express an inclination that the case should be dismissed on that basis. How, then, could they possibly determine that the Appellants have a "high likelihood of success on the merits"? And how can they show that the Appellants will suffer any harm if loving couples in California are allowed to marry each other?

Second, the Court wants this case to be resolved quickly. Appellants' opening brief is due in just a month and the hearing will happen on December 6th. This is lightning quick for a Federal Court of Appeals, and it's a very good sign. The Court understands that this case is important, and it doesn't want it to linger.

Third, the Court specifically orders the Prop 8 proponents to show why this case should not be dismissed for lack of standing. This is very good news for us. It shows that the Court has serious doubts about whether the Appellants have standing.

Even better, the Court is expressing an opinion that its inclination is that the case should be dismissed. That being said, the panel that issued this Order (the motions panel) is not the same panel that will hear that case on the merits. The merits panel will be selected shortly before December 6th and we don't know the three judges who will be on the merits panel. But this is a very good sign that the appeal could be dismissed on the ground of standing alone."

MsTinkerbelly · 08-16-2010, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyclopea

"First, and drastically most importantly, the Court granted the stay. Consequently the thousands of couples who were waiting for the day of equality will have to wait at least a few more months until December. It's interesting that the panel does not at all discuss the reasons for their decision on the motion to stay. That's because if they went through the factors, there's no way they could rationalize the stay. They themselves raise the issue of standing and express an inclination that the case should be dismissed on that basis. How, then, could they possibly determine that the Appellants have a "high likelihood of success on the merits"? And how can they show that the Appellants will suffer any harm if loving couples in California are allowed to marry each other?

Second, the Court wants this case to be resolved quickly. Appellants' opening brief is due in just a month and the hearing will happen on December 6th. This is lightning quick for a Federal Court of Appeals, and it's a very good sign. The Court understands that this case is important, and it doesn't want it to linger.

Third, the Court specifically orders the Prop 8 proponents to show why this case should not be dismissed for lack of standing. This is very good news for us. It shows that the Court has serious doubts about whether the Appellants have standing.

Even better, the Court is expressing an opinion that its inclination is that the case should be dismissed. That being said, the panel that issued this Order (the motions panel) is not the same panel that will hear that case on the merits. The merits panel will be selected shortly before December 6th and we don't know the three judges who will be on the merits panel. But this is a very good sign that the appeal could be dismissed on the ground of standing alone."

LOL---sorry! I was posting at the same time as you were and posted just about the same thing!

MsTinkerbelly · 08-16-2010, 07:02 PM

Meanwhile, Prof. Tobias Wolff, who helped the equality side with Prop 8 litigation during the California Supreme Court phase, just emailed me the following opinion on the 9th Circuit’s stay ruling and its significance to the case:

AFER’s optimistic assessment is not just spin. The Ninth Circuit’s expedited briefing schedule is significant. Also highly significant (though AFER does not mention it in their release) is the Ninth Circuit’s instruction to the parties to focus particular attention on the question of whether the appeal should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to the proponents’ lack of independent standing.

A victory in this appeal on the jurisdiction / standing issue would be phenomenal. Although the principles established in Judge Walker’s ruling would only result in the striking down of Proposition 8, rather than the establishment of marriage equality nationwide, dismissal of the appeal would eliminate the risk associated with bringing these claims before the Supreme Court of the United States — the most conservative Court that we have had in the last fifty years, in many respects — and Judge Walker’s devastating analysis of the factual record and the utter lack of evidence supporting any reason for excluding same-sex couples from marriage would remain on the books and be available for us to cite in all our future efforts at litigation and legislative reform.

It is frustrating that California couples will need to wait yet longer to have their rights vindicated, but this order holds much promise for the successful elimination of Proposition 8 once and for all.

UPDATE BY EDEN: California Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez (D-Los Angeles), the state’s first openly gay legislative leader, has issued the following statement:

“Today’s ruling by the Ninth Circuit panel is consistent with the fact that groundbreaking decisions are often stayed pending appeal. The fact that the Court is expediting the hearing schedule only underscores the point Judge Walker made in his ruling: LGBT Californians have suffered, and are suffering, from having our constitutional right to equal protection and due process violated every moment Prop 8 remains in effect. This ruling is a reflection on established legal convention, and in no way diminishes the powerful and eloquent statement in defense of our constitutional rights Judge Walker made in his ruling.”

christie · 08-17-2010, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MsTinkerbelly

Meanwhile, Prof. Tobias Wolff, who helped the equality side with Prop 8 litigation during the California Supreme Court phase, just emailed me the following opinion on the 9th Circuit’s stay ruling and its significance to the case:

AFER’s optimistic assessment is not just spin. The Ninth Circuit’s expedited briefing schedule is significant. Also highly significant (though AFER does not mention it in their release) is the Ninth Circuit’s instruction to the parties to focus particular attention on the question of whether the appeal should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to the proponents’ lack of independent standing.

A victory in this appeal on the jurisdiction / standing issue would be phenomenal. Although the principles established in Judge Walker’s ruling would only result in the striking down of Proposition 8, rather than the establishment of marriage equality nationwide, dismissal of the appeal would eliminate the risk associated with bringing these claims before the Supreme Court of the United States — the most conservative Court that we have had in the last fifty years, in many respects — and Judge Walker’s devastating analysis of the factual record and the utter lack of evidence supporting any reason for excluding same-sex couples from marriage would remain on the books and be available for us to cite in all our future efforts at litigation and legislative reform.

It is frustrating that California couples will need to wait yet longer to have their rights vindicated, but this order holds much promise for the successful elimination of Proposition 8 once and for all.

UPDATE BY EDEN: California Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez (D-Los Angeles), the state’s first openly gay legislative leader, has issued the following statement:

“Today’s ruling by the Ninth Circuit panel is consistent with the fact that groundbreaking decisions are often stayed pending appeal. The fact that the Court is expediting the hearing schedule only underscores the point Judge Walker made in his ruling: LGBT Californians have suffered, and are suffering, from having our constitutional right to equal protection and due process violated every moment Prop 8 remains in effect. This ruling is a reflection on established legal convention, and in no way diminishes the powerful and eloquent statement in defense of our constitutional rights Judge Walker made in his ruling.”

Just an FYI about the prop 8 trial tracker - we got to meet Phyllis (one of the NOM trackers) on Sunday - she was just great. There is a pic posted of yours truly and Jess about halfway down the page. I'm the one with the pink (ugh) backpack! Our son is the tall kid in the plaid hat behind us. Its not the greatest picture in the world - after a morning of touristy hell in the rain, we were just glad to be standing still!

Also - lil fella, Will Phillips - well, I won't be surprised if he is a world leader. Its amazing what our kids can teach us if we listen.

MsTinkerbelly · 08-17-2010, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by christie0918

Just an FYI about the prop 8 trial tracker - we got to meet Phyllis (one of the NOM trackers) on Sunday - she was just great. There is a pic posted of yours truly and Jess about halfway down the page. I'm the one with the pink (ugh) backpack! Our son is the tall kid in the plaid hat behind us. Its not the greatest picture in the world - after a morning of touristy hell in the rain, we were just glad to be standing

still!

Also - lil fella, Will Phillips - well, I won't be surprised if he is a world leader. Its amazing what our kids can teach us if we listen.

Awesome picture!

I had seen the picture when looking through the site...I love seeing pictures of Butch-Femme couples!

Cyclopea · 08-17-2010, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by christie0918

Just an FYI about the prop 8 trial tracker - we got to meet Phyllis (one of the NOM trackers) on Sunday - she was just great. There is a pic posted of yours truly and Jess about halfway down the page. I'm the one with the pink (ugh) backpack! Our son is the tall kid in the plaid hat behind us. Its not the greatest picture in the world - after a morning of touristy hell in the rain, we were just glad to be standing still!

Also - lil fella, Will Phillips - well, I won't be surprised if he is a world leader. Its amazing what our kids can teach us if we listen.

Great Pic!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/courage...gn/4895011402/

Soon · 08-17-2010, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyclopea

Great Pic!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/courage...gn/4895011402/

Ya cuties!!!

Fabulous!

christie · 08-17-2010, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyclopea

Great Pic!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/courage...gn/4895011402/

Quote:

Originally Posted by HowSoonIsNow

Ya cuties!!!

Fabulous!

Oh wow. That's us! LOL I had no clue it was posted elsewhere!

There was one of us really smoochin - the fella made us hold it for his shot. I have NO clue as to where that one wound up!

It was great to be there. I was disappointed that the counter rally was a MILE away from the NOM nutjobs. It was also an unexpected surprise that our hotel was on the corner opposite the HRC Natl HQ.

I do think that I was really nice to some of the NOM folks at the Natural History Museum - they were standing in front taking pictures of one another and I offered to take one of them as a group. A couple of the ladies were really gracious while the older man and woman looked as if they wished the earth would open and swallow me. Oh well. Kill 'em with kindness!!

08-16-2010, 05:48 PM	#1
Cyclopea Member How Do You Identify?: Butch Lesbian Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Exit Zero Posts: 1,267 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 1,694 Thanked 1,615 Times in 632 Posts Rep Power: 226200	from Pam "First, and drastically most importantly, the Court granted the stay. Consequently the thousands of couples who were waiting for the day of equality will have to wait at least a few more months until December. It's interesting that the panel does not at all discuss the reasons for their decision on the motion to stay. That's because if they went through the factors, there's no way they could rationalize the stay. They themselves raise the issue of standing and express an inclination that the case should be dismissed on that basis. How, then, could they possibly determine that the Appellants have a "high likelihood of success on the merits"? And how can they show that the Appellants will suffer any harm if loving couples in California are allowed to marry each other? Second, the Court wants this case to be resolved quickly. Appellants' opening brief is due in just a month and the hearing will happen on December 6th. This is lightning quick for a Federal Court of Appeals, and it's a very good sign. The Court understands that this case is important, and it doesn't want it to linger. Third, the Court specifically orders the Prop 8 proponents to show why this case should not be dismissed for lack of standing. This is very good news for us. It shows that the Court has serious doubts about whether the Appellants have standing. Even better, the Court is expressing an opinion that its inclination is that the case should be dismissed. That being said, the panel that issued this Order (the motions panel) is not the same panel that will hear that case on the merits. The merits panel will be selected shortly before December 6th and we don't know the three judges who will be on the merits panel. But this is a very good sign that the appeal could be dismissed on the ground of standing alone." __________________ http://forum.axishistory.com/images/...arious/eye.jpg

08-16-2010, 07:02 PM	#3
MsTinkerbelly Timed Out - TOS Drama How Do You Identify?: ... Preferred Pronoun?: ... Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: ... Posts: 6,573 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 30,737 Thanked 22,907 Times in 5,017 Posts Rep Power: 0	A little more analysis from the Prop8 8 Trial Tracker blog Meanwhile, Prof. Tobias Wolff, who helped the equality side with Prop 8 litigation during the California Supreme Court phase, just emailed me the following opinion on the 9th Circuit’s stay ruling and its significance to the case: AFER’s optimistic assessment is not just spin. The Ninth Circuit’s expedited briefing schedule is significant. Also highly significant (though AFER does not mention it in their release) is the Ninth Circuit’s instruction to the parties to focus particular attention on the question of whether the appeal should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to the proponents’ lack of independent standing. A victory in this appeal on the jurisdiction / standing issue would be phenomenal. Although the principles established in Judge Walker’s ruling would only result in the striking down of Proposition 8, rather than the establishment of marriage equality nationwide, dismissal of the appeal would eliminate the risk associated with bringing these claims before the Supreme Court of the United States — the most conservative Court that we have had in the last fifty years, in many respects — and Judge Walker’s devastating analysis of the factual record and the utter lack of evidence supporting any reason for excluding same-sex couples from marriage would remain on the books and be available for us to cite in all our future efforts at litigation and legislative reform. It is frustrating that California couples will need to wait yet longer to have their rights vindicated, but this order holds much promise for the successful elimination of Proposition 8 once and for all. UPDATE BY EDEN: California Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez (D-Los Angeles), the state’s first openly gay legislative leader, has issued the following statement: “Today’s ruling by the Ninth Circuit panel is consistent with the fact that groundbreaking decisions are often stayed pending appeal. The fact that the Court is expediting the hearing schedule only underscores the point Judge Walker made in his ruling: LGBT Californians have suffered, and are suffering, from having our constitutional right to equal protection and due process violated every moment Prop 8 remains in effect. This ruling is a reflection on established legal convention, and in no way diminishes the powerful and eloquent statement in defense of our constitutional rights Judge Walker made in his ruling.”