First Day of Prop 8 Trial Concludes: A Few Updates
A few updates on the Prop 8 trial, which the NYT reports opened with "sharp words" from Judge Walker. The trial is expected to reach the Supreme Court, but not before what's estimated to be three weeks of wide-ranging testimony from a variety of sources.
The Mercury News has some good coverage of the day's events, in a timeline.
The first day saw opening statements as well as testimony from plaintiffs Jeffrey Zarrillo and Paul Katami, and Kristin Perry and Sandy Stier (all pictured, bottom right).
The AP's Lisa Leff reports:
Among other things, Walker asked how Proposition 8 could be discriminatory since California already allows domestic partnerships that carry the same rights and benefits of marriage.
"If California would simply get out of the marriage business and classify everyone as a domestic partnership, would that solve the problem?" the judge asked.
Former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson, who represent two same-sex couples who filed the suit, answered that he did not think such a move would be politically feasible.
"I suspect the people of California would not want to abandon the relationship that the proponents of Proposition 8 spent a tremendous amount of resources describing as important to people, and so important it must be reserved for opposite-sex couples," he said.
Olson quoted the U.S. Supreme Court's own lofty description of matrimony to demonstrate what his clients were being denied.
"In the words of the highest court in the land, marriage is the most important relationship in life and of fundamental importance to all individuals," Olson told a courtroom packed with witnesses, reporters and members of the public.
Leff adds: "Attorney Charles Cooper, who is representing Proposition 8 sponsors, said it's too difficult to know the impact of gay marriage on traditional marriage because the practice is still so new. Only five states have opened the institution to same-sex couples, and three of them had them imposed on them by judges, he said.' While the people of California have been steadfast in their defense of marriage, they have also been generous in their extending of the rights and benefits and protections of marriage to the gay and lesbian population,' Cooper said. He also noted that President Barack Obama doesn't support legalizing gay marriage, a remark that prompted Judge Walker to note that Obama's own parents would not have been allowed to get married in some states before the Supreme Court overturned state bans on interracial marriage in 1967. "That indicates there is quite a change in individuals' entitlement to enter the institution" of marriage, Walker said."
Much more at her story...
Think Progress reports that Olson went after right-wing fear-mongering on marriage equality.
Karen Ocamb has a report on the first half of the day: "Charles Cooper for the defense seemed all over the place – arguing what we’ve heard often before – that marriage is historically and culturally been defined as between a man and a woman for the purposes of procreation and a stable society. Judge Walker asked how same sex marriages effected heterosexual marriages – and he says it does because it 'de-institutionalizes' the institution. Again, more on this later. I don’t think Cooper did well – and it turns out that three more of their witnesses dropped out this morning, per Stewart.
This morning’s testimony was basically by the gay male plaintiffs – Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo. Jeff went first and was emotional at several points talking about the difficulty coming out and being categorized as a second class citizen. No questions from Cooper."
The L.A. Times reports on testimony by the two plaintiffs who brought the suit:
"Jeffrey Zarrillo, who has been in a relationship with another man for nearly nine years, testified that he wanted to marry Paul Katami. 'He is the love of my life. I love him probably more than I love myself. I would do anything for him,' Zarrillo said. Zarrillo said others would view his and Katami's relationship differently if they were married. 'It says to them, 'These individuals are serious, these individuals are committed to each other,'' he testified, his voice breaking often as he spoke."
About 100 people demonstrated outside the courthouse this morning as the trial began.
Watch the AP's video report, which features interviews with activist Cleve Jones, Equality California's Geoff Kors, and others outside the courthouse, AFTER THE JUMP...




"it's too difficult to know the impact of gay marriage on traditional marriage because the practice is still so new." - REALLY???
Do Americans think they live on another planet? Gay marriage has been legal in several countries for years now. WTF?
Posted by: D.R.H. | Jan 11, 2010 7:30:38 PM
Yes, many Americans do think they live on another planet, or that the US is the only planet. Knowledge of international affairs is abysmal among most US citizens.
I wish a lot of US citizens did live on other planets.
Posted by: Paul R | Jan 11, 2010 7:53:26 PM
A note to Andy (Towle): Thank you so very much for doing such a great job following and reporting on this event. I followed you all day long, on Twitter, Facebook and the website itself and your reporting gives me, and I'm sure many others, a lot of great hope. I was moved to tearful emotion over Zarillo's testimony because I've been there (that much in love with another man) and want other gay people to know that it is a good and right thing to follow your heart.
More then anything I want us (the gay community) to win this case. I'll be sorely disappointed if we don't but I won't give up hope. I envy young people today because they are growing up in a world I could only dream about when I was their age. Yet I still hold out hope that we all will experience an end to the prejudice and fear so many have endured. We are good, talented, happy and amazing people.
Posted by: OS2guy | Jan 12, 2010 1:02:19 AM
Maybe we should have this legal team fight our battles for awhile instead of whomever we've been pouring millions of dollars into for years?
Posted by: DEREK WASHINGTON | Jan 12, 2010 5:27:41 AM
Gay marriage will harm the institution of marriage, only I can't tell you how because it's so new.
________________________________________________
Um, this is the best they've got, and the Supreme Court is going to have to decide the issue. You'd think these arguments would have failed years ago.
I'd have more respect for them if they just came out and said, "because the Bible tells me so." At least it would be more honest.
Posted by: David T | Jan 12, 2010 7:52:51 AM
Hear hear, Derek!
Posted by: freddy | Jan 12, 2010 8:07:39 AM
David says it most succinctly and in this country the piece of fiction known as the bible supplants the constitution every time.
It will be a long while before LBGT folks receive equal rights- lest we forget-women are still waiting......... still no ERA here in Umerica.
Posted by: Nick | Jan 12, 2010 8:26:07 AM
well, it sounds like the judge is waiting to hear what evidence that the opposition has that he hasn't heard before. I can't wait til someone says it's the in the bible...because this man will pounce of them.
i have said this all along...this case must go to the supreme court because there we have a fighting chance. You can't let voters decide this issue...they are not educated enough to understand the inequalities of it...only that is it "icky" to them. Well, "icky" or not doesn't mean that it hurts them or their marriage which is exactlyly what evidence will have to present and prove in order for them to ban our relationship or our marriages.
Posted by: Paul | Jan 12, 2010 12:53:25 PM