Attorneys Urge California Supreme Court To Invalidate Prop 8

Case Raises Important Legal Issues Affecting All Minority

(, CA, March 5, 2009) for same- , organizations and the state ’s office appeared before the California today to the court to strike down Proposition 8, which took away the right of same- the right to marry. At issue in the case is whether the ballot process can be used to take away a only for one group of based on a trait – in this case – that has no relevance to the group’s ability to participate in or contribute to society. Because the case has serious implications for the of all , it has generated from many national and state as well as California , , bar associations, business interests, labor , and religious . The California , which has struck down several other in the past, is expected to issue a decision within 90 days.

“Proposition 8 jeopardizes not just the right of same- to marry, but the rights of all to be treated as free and equal of this state,” said Shannon P. , of the National Center for Rights (), who argued the case before the Court. “Our is based on the that must . But if a majority can change the to take away a from one group, then it can take away from any group. Our government will have changed from one that respects to one in which the power of the majority is unlimited.”

, , and the filed the on November 5, after Proposition 8 was approved by just 52 percent of the voters on . In court today, the argued that it was improper for the of Proposition 8 to use the ballot process to strip same- of the to marry. The contend that changes to the that alter its core requirement of equal protection by selectively depriving of fundamental cannot be accomplished through a simple majority . Such major changes of core structural principles are revisions to the that can only be put on the ballot by a two-thirds of both houses of the legislature.

“It is simply wrong—legally and socially—to short-circuit the California and its equal protection guarantees,” said Jennifer C. , for and co-counsel in the to Proposition 8. “Proposition 8 is no ‘garden variety’ amendment that changes a tax or zoning or safety rule in a way that affects everyone equally. This is a radical to strip a cherished constitutional right from just one targeted and then to stop the courts from doing their most basic of upholding the constitutional of ‘ for all’.”

The case before the court is unprecedented because no other -amendment has successfully taken away a only for a particular minority. Because Proposition 8 would, for the first time, change the in a way that strips a of its constitutional right to under the law, California agrees that Proposition 8 should be struck down. The ’s office argued that the right to marry is an “” that can not be selectively eliminated from one group without compelling reasons.
“The Court has a solemn responsibility to enforce our state and to protect the rights of all , regardless of popular opinion,” said , a with the of Northern California. “This case isn’t just about , and it’s certainly not just about and . If the Court strikes down Proposition 8, it will be protecting the of all .”

An unprecedented 43 friend-of-the-court , representing hundreds of , , and labor , and numerous California , bar associations, and leading , were filed in the case, urging the court to strike down the . Because the issues at have such important implications for other minority , Raymond Marshall of Bingham McCutchen, who represents the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, the California State Conference of the NAACP, the , the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, asked and was given permission to appear in court today. He argued that allowing Proposition 8 to stand could be detrimental to other minority who could easily become the of seeking to take away their rights.

“Our state was created to ensure under the law for every Californian,” said Geoff Kors, of California. “Prop 8 changes that fact by taking away a fundamental from one particular group and mandating government against a minority. We hope the court upholds the ’s of .”

The National Center for Rights, , and the are representing California, whose include many same- who married between June 16 and November 4, 2008, and six same- who want to marry in California. The arguments today also included two other filed on the same day: one filed by the City and County of (joined by Santa Clara County and the City of Los Angeles, and subsequently by and other ); and another filed by a private attorney.

Serving as co-counsel on the case with , , and the are the Law Office of David C. Codell, Munger, Tolles &; Olson LLP, and Orrick, Herrington &; Sutcliffe LLP.

The case is Strauss et al. v. Horton et al. (#S168047). For more information, go to: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/highprofile/prop8.htm
The California must issue its within 90 days of argument.
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual

Published by&; Published by xFruits

: http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/attorneys-urg…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Case Against Prop 8 — Oral Argument and Telephone Briefing Today!

Today another historic argument will be made before the state in California to protect the constitutional of equal protection for all and to fight to restore . , , the and others have been working for months to prepare for today’s argument in our historic case against Prop 8. And now you can be among the first to know what happened in the . By making a gift to , you can join our –only telephone briefing immediately following the argument.
At 3 pm PST (6 pm EST), ’s National and our Jon Davidson will discuss the latest developments in the Strauss v. Horton case. If you’re interested in watching the argument, we have learned that it will be aired on California’s and streamed online. (High traffic at the site may impair viewing.)
Upholding the California ’s to protect the rights of is important for all Americans. In January, hundreds of , and labor , and of California , bar associations and leading agreed that the rights of all vulnerable are at as they collectively urged the California to strike down Prop 8. The California has also argued that Prop 8 is invalid.
Be in the know, every step of the way. With your support, we are making history. Take this final opportunity to join and receive instructions on how to sign up for today’s conference call. Join us as we discuss the justices’ questions and what may come next in this fight to uphold the and our equal to marry in California!

* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual

Published by&; Published by xFruits

: http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/case-against-…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Equality California Launches Statewide TV Ad Campaign on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Movement

Ad to inspire as continues efforts to achieve full

California () today launched a ad campaign that will air statewide on the history of the , , Bi-sexual and () movement. The ad educates about the faced by throughout history to provide hope for the future.

“This ad shines a light on some of the many ugly chapters in history that have endured, to inspire to remain committed and unified as we change to achieve full ,” said Geoff Kors, of California.

“This ad not only serves as an but also helps generate and advance conversations so that ultimately we foster an where everyone is treated with and .”

This week the California will hear the against Proposition 8, the ballot which stripped same- of the right to marry. The National Center for Rights counsel, with co-counsel and the , filed this challenge on November 5, representing California, whose include many same- who married after the Court ruled that the state can no longer exclude same- from civil on May 15, 2008.

Hundreds of , , and labor , along with numerous California , bar associations, and leading collectively urged the California to strike down Proposition 8.

To view the ad, please visit: www.eqca.org/hope.
California () is the largest statewide , , and () rights-. In the past , has strategically moved California from a state with extremely limited for individuals to a state with some of the most comprehensive civil-rights protections in the nation. has passed over 50 pieces of and continues to advance through legislative advocacy, public and community empowerment. http://www.eqca.org/ * Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual

Published by&; Published by xFruits

: http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/equality-cali…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Legal Groups, City of West Hollywood to Host Viewing of Oral Arguments in Proposition 8 Challenge

(West , March 2, 2008) — , the L.A. &; Center, the American , the National Center for Rights and the City of West will host a viewing of arguments in the Proposition 8 on Thursday, March 5, 2009 at West Auditorium, followed by a press conference…

for same- , organizations and the state ’s office will appear before the California on March 5 to the court to strike down Proposition 8. At issue in the case is whether the process can be used to strip and of under the law by taking away their to marry. Because the case has serious implications for any , it has generated from many national and state as well as California , , bar associations, business interests, labor , and religious .

and other of the public, along with for the challenging Proposition 8, will be available for interview at the viewing of the arguments, which will be televised live. Following arguments, as well as representatives of friends of the court will hold a at the auditorium to give their reaction to the day’s and put them into perspective.

Published by&; Published by xFruits

: http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/legal-groups-…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

California Supreme Court to Hear Oral Arguments in Prop 8 Legal Challenge on March 5

, Governor, and nation’s top agree: Invalidate Prop 8

(, CA, February 3, 2009) The California announced today that it will hear arguments on Thursday, March 5, 2009 in the Proposition 8 . The National Center for Rights, , and the —with support from , , labor , and —argue that Proposition 8 is invalid because the of California have established strict safeguards that prohibit the underlying principles of the California from being changed by a simple majority . By taking away a right only from one group, Proposition 8 violates the most basic of our government: that all are entitled to under the law.

California is also asking the Court to invalidate Proposition 8 on the ground that certain , including the right to marry, are inalienable and can not be put up for a popular .

On November 10, 2008, Governor stated that he hoped the Court would overturn Proposition 8. On , he said of Proposition 8’s passage, “It’s unfortunate, obviously, but it’s not the end, I think that we will again maybe undo that, if the court is willing to do that, and then move forward from there and again in that area.”

On November 19, 2008, the California agreed to hear the legal to Proposition 8 and set an expedited schedule. Briefing in the case was completed on January 21, 2009.
The California must issue its within 90 days of argument.

On January 15, 2009, 43 friend-of-the-court urging the Court to invalidate Prop 8 were filed, arguing that Proposition 8 drastically alters the equal protection in California’s and that the rights of a minority cannot be eliminated by a simple majority . The supporters represent the full of California’s and the nation’s organizations and , as well as California , , bar associations, business interests, labor , and religious .

In May of 2008, the California held that laws that treat differently based on their violate the equal protection clause of the California and that same- have the same to marry as other . Proposition 8 eliminated this only for same- . No other has ever successfully changed the California to take away a right only from a targeted . Proposition 8 passed by a bare majority of 52 percent on November 4.

The National Center for Rights, , and the filed this challenge on November 5, representing California, whose include many same- who married between June 16 and November 4, 2008, and six same- who want to marry in California. The California has also agreed to hear two other filed on the same day: one filed by the City and County of (joined by Santa Clara County and the City of Los Angeles, and subsequently by and other ); and another filed by a private attorney.

Serving as co-counsel on the case with , , and the are the Law Office of David C. Codell, Munger, Tolles &; Olson LLP, and Orrick, Herrington &; Sutcliffe LLP.

The case is Strauss et al. v. Horton et al. (#S168047). For more information, go to: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/highprofile/prop8.htm

works to achieve and secure for . To improve the lives of , sponsors and coordinates efforts to ensure its passage, and other policy makers, builds coalitions, develops and empowers individuals and other organizations to engage in the political process.&;www.eqca.org

The National Center for Rights is a national legal committed to advancing the civil and of , , , and and their families through litigation, public policy advocacy, and public .&;www.nclrights.org/overturn8

is a national committed to achieving full recognition of the of , men, , and those with through impact litigation, and public policy work. www.lambdalegal.org

The American is America’s foremost of . It fights and moves public opinion on rights through the courts, legislatures and public . www.aclu.org

Published by&; Published by xFruits

: http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/02/california-su…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Hawaii lawmakers to consider gaming, gay marriage

proposals would be designed to give the same rights as married , said Rep. Blake , D--Halawaii.

“It’s always been about and ,” said.

Civil have broader support from labor unions and some religious this year than in the past, said Rep. Jon Karamatsu, D--, the new House chairman who will hear the bill.

&;See Hawaii lawmakers to consider gaming, gay marriage
Forbes - NY,

Published by&; Published by xFruits

: http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/01/hawaii-lawmak…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

America’s top civil rights groups and legal scholars agree: Invalidate Prop 8

&;

&;(, CA, January 21, 2009) In the last round of an expedited briefing schedule, final were filed today by both petitioners and respondents in the challenging Proposition 8. The filed today by the National Center for Rights, , and the responded to the more than 60 amicus curiae, or “,” filed in the case last week.

Those amicus highlight the extraordinary breadth of support for Petitioners’ argument that Proposition 8 is invalid.&; The supporters represent the full of California’s and the nation’s organizations and , as well as California , , bar associations, business interests, labor , and religious .

In amicus filed last Thursday, the nation’s leading argued that Proposition 8 is invalid because it seeks to eliminate a only for a targeted minority, which cannot be done through the process. Professors from the most prominent universities and and the country authored urging the Court to invalidate Proposition 8, including scholars from University, , Yale University,&; (Berkeley, Los Angeles, Hastings, Davis, Irvine), University of , University of Pennsylvania, , University of , , , , and .

A brief authored by Hastings Donna Ryu and joined by 20 constitutional law experts, argued:&; “Proposition 8 represents the first time that the California process has been wielded to abolish a fundamental for an unpopular and to alter the so as to governmental against that group. In this way, Proposition 8 to breach some of the most elemental textual and structural promises of our state . It revokes a that, in the words of the , is “inalienable.” It dismantles constitutional for a single group of – a group that, because of its history of oppression and stigma, is entitled to the highest level of constitutional protection against .”

Another brief authored by Professor Karl Manheim, one of the foremost on California’s process, stated:&; “Proposition 8 . . . improperly to revise the by taking the of singling out a suspect class and depriving that class – and only that class – of a .”

On January 15, 2009, 43 friend-of-the-court urging the Court to invalidate Prop 8 were filed, arguing that Proposition 8 drastically alters the equal protection in California’s , and that the rights of a minority cannot be eliminated by a simple majority .

Other supporting the to Prop 8 were filed on behalf of 652 current and former California ; of bar associations, legal aid organizations; and numerous California .

In May of 2008, the California held that laws that treat differently based on their violate the equal protection clause of the California and that same- have the same to marry as other . Proposition 8 eliminated this only for same- . No other has ever successfully changed the California to take away a right only from a targeted . Proposition 8 passed by a bare 52 percent on November 4.

The National Center for Rights, , and the filed this challenge on November 5, representing California, whose include many same- who married between June 16 and November 4, 2008, and six same- who want to marry in California. The California has also agreed to hear two other filed on the same day: one filed by the City and County of (joined by Santa Clara County and the City of Los Angeles, and subsequently by and other ); and another filed by a private attorney. These three cases are jointly under review by the California .

Serving as co-counsel on the case with , , and the are the Law Office of David C. Codell, Munger, Tolles &; Olson LLP, and Orrick, Herrington &; Sutcliffe LLP.

On November 19, 2008, the California granted review in the legal to Proposition 8, and established an expedited briefing schedule, under which briefing was completed on January 21, 2009. The California has stated that it may schedule argument as early as March 2009.

The case is Strauss et al. v. Horton et al. (

S168047).

Published by&; Published by xFruits

: http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/01/americas-top-…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Religious, labor groups urge Court to invalidate Prop 8

(, California) and labor have joined the call for the of California to invalidate Proposition 8, the amendment to the state approved in November by voters that restricts to opposite- .

The California Council of and other and …

Read more….

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Labor unions, churches to fight gay marriage ban in court

Gay Labor and some announced Tuesday that they planned to file friend-of-the-court in support of invalidating Proposition 8, the November ballot that banned in the state.

The California Council of and other including the Progressive representing millions of said they will file on Thursday.

On Friday, a coalition of labor representing more than 2 million said they planned to file their own brief. The will support the filed by -rights the day after Proposition 8 was enacted.

The California has agreed to take the case and could hear arguments as soon as March.

&;See Labor unions, churches to fight gay marriage ban in court
,&;CA&;-

Published by&; Published by xFruits

: http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/01/labor-unions-…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Equality California Calls Prop 8 Proponents’ New Lawsuit Hypocritical

Sacramento&;— of Proposition 8 today filed a lawsuit in federal court asking that a finance passed by the voters be invalidated.

Statement from California Geoff Kors in response to the lawsuit:

“This lawsuit could not be more hypocritical. During the Proposition 8 campaign, the very same who filed this sent menacing letters to California’s , as well as corporations, labor , and individuals who stood up to and supported the NO on 8 Campaign. Now they are calling themselves the victims. What’s more, these are arguing on the one hand that voter like Prop 8 should never be overturned by courts. On the other, they are asking a federal court to void a law that was passed by voter in California. They are asking that to Yes on 8 and only Yes on 8, even if illegal, be hidden from the public. This us to wonder what they have to hide?”

works to achieve and secure for . To improve the lives of , sponsors and coordinates efforts to ensure its passage, and other policy makers, builds coalitions, develops and empowers individuals and other organizations to engage in the political process. www.eqca.org

Published by&; Published by xFruits

: http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/01/equality-cali…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Gay Blogads

website stats