Pages

Thursday, May 15, 2008

News Flash

The WW community supports families of every sort. Today, the California Supreme Court -- which, despite the stereotypes about my state, is pretty darned conservative -- decided that same-sex marriages do not violate the California Constitution.
We therefore conclude that in view of the substance and significance of the
fundamental constitutional right to form a family relationship, the California
Constitution properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to
all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well
as to opposite-sex couples.

Here is a news clip. Here is the Court opinion.

I'm calling this the Anti-Whine of the week, and one a long time coming.

17 comments:

Sue said...

WOO HOO!!!!

Definitely the Anti-Whine of the week!

Elizabeth said...

cheers cheers

Miranda said...

This is truly wonderful news and I wait for all 50 states to embrace the rights of all of our families.

kathy a. said...

my heart thumps -- daughter called a while ago from oregon, asking if it was true! she and her pals are working the cell phones, spreading the news.

amy said...

i think it's a good day for families of all shapes and sizes, in spite of what some people say.

Miranda said...

Several of my friends on Facebook, most of whom are straight and all of whom live somewhere other than Cali, have status messages celebrating this ruling. I am truly excited.

turtlebella said...

Yes- I agree, it's a huge anti-whine. Very exciting! Only 48 states to go!!! :)

liz said...

WOOT!

Yankee T said...

I think you know how I feel. Thanks for posting this!

margalit said...

Joining New England, especially Massachusetts, congrats to California for seeing the light. Now let us pray that the Governator doesn't work to bring a new proposition to the people to ban this ruling.

kathy said...

There will be a ballot measure to change the state constitution. The governator now says he does not support the ballot measure.

debangel said...

Can't we make an "About Freakin' Time" award?

kathy said...

Actually, Ahnold went farther: he said he respects and will enforce the Court's ruling, AND opposes a constitutional amendment to override the ruling.

Opponents of gay marriage wanted to get the governor to instruct county officials to NOT issue licenses until the ballot initiative is voted on in November, but that's not happening.

[They will probably lobby officials in the various counties, and it's possible some counties could obstruct marriages -- but they won't have a legal leg to stand on. People denied licenses should be able to get injunctions to force officials to comply with the law, and I'd guess pretty swiftly -- days, not years.]

I think it is significant that the Chief Justice wrote the lead opinion. My guess is that he wanted to send a signal about its importance, using his position as Chief Justice of California to absorb some of the heat. This is absolutely not a liberal justice. This decision makes him and the justices voting with him politically vulnerable, since the Supreme Court justices are subject to re-election; former Chief Justice Rose Bird and two other justices were kicked to the curb in an election 20 years ago, for example.

Madeleine said...

Woo-hoo! Wonderful news.

Proving once again that "It's the Economy, Even if it Makes Us Sound Stupid," my hometown paper laments in a teaser on the front page that this could eat into our same-sex marriage-destination economy.

BlackenedBoy said...

This is so wonderful You know that the right-wingers will be apoplectic, though. They can rant on about God all they want--the law is the law, and eventually their hatred will not prevail.

BlackenedBoy said...

I mean, really, this is the whole point of the court system: to uphold the Constitution and the rightrs of all Americans, even when doing so may be unpopular or politically inexpedient.

This is why the judicial branch is set apart from the others, why the courts are isolated from direct public reproach or approval.

What the Republicans call "activist judges" are in fact just people doing their job and enforcing laws that the politicians would be too afraid to stand behind.

Were it not for the courts intervening, desegregation wouldn't have come until decades after it did, if at all.

kathy a. said...

right on, blackened boy.

just want to point out again -- this is no activist court. 6 of 7 members are republicans.