The Survival of Prop 8

The Survival of Prop 8

Oral arguments were given Monday in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the appeal case on the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8.

The first hour and a half of arguments was devoted mainly to the question of “standing” to determine whether those responsible for putting the measure on the ballot were eligible to appeal it since they are not responsible for enforcing it. The question of “standing” became an issue when California’s governor and attorney general refused to defend Prop 8 and other parties were forced to step in to defend it.  The second hour focused on the constitutionality and the merit of Prop 8.

Jordan Lorence of Alliance Defense Fund [ADF is part of the defense team for Prop 8] gives a common sense response to those who contend that marriage is simply about love and commitment.  He makes the case for the “merit” of man/woman marriage.  You can read his short article here.

For those of you who would like a more technical analysis of today’s oral argument on Prop 8, you can read Ed Whelan’s observations here. If you’d like to see some video excerpts, you can watch the PBS newscast below.

There is no time set for the delivery of the ruling/decision.  But because this appeal was expedited by the court, it is assumed that a decision may be delivered more expeditiously as well.  Whatever the outcome, all agree that California’s Prop 8 is on its way to the U.S. Supreme Court and the definition of marriage for all of the United States hangs in the balance.


1 Comment
  • NotAScientist
    Posted at 11:22h, 07 December

    “and the definition of marriage for all of the United States hangs in the balance.”

    Not quite.

    The definition of marriage for homosexual Americans hangs in the balance. The definition of marriage for heterosexuals is the same regardless what happens.

Post A Comment