David Boies | Federal Prop 8 Trial | Gay Marriage | News | Proposition 8 | Ted Olson

Final Briefs Submitted in Prop 8 Case; PBS Special Airs


Ted Olson and David Boies, the attorneys leading the federal challenge to Proposition 8 in California, submitted a 294-page document on Friday as part of final filings in the case.

Walker  Said Chad Griffin, Board President of the American Foundation for Equal Rights: "This 294-page filing is only a summary of the overwhelming evidence against Proposition 8. The evidence proves beyond a doubt that Proposition 8, which separates Americans into unequal groups, violates the U.S. Constitution and causes incredible harm to individuals and our nation as a whole."

The document submitted to Judge Vaughn Walker by Olson and Boies is available here.

The San Francisco Chronicle summed up the filings from both sides.

The AP reports: "In papers filed late Friday, lawyers for the sponsors of California's gay marriage ban offered new twists on their claim that allowing gay men and lesbians to wed could undermine man-woman unions. The potential harms they cited included giving bisexuals a legal basis for pursuing group marriages and unmarried fathers an incentive to abandon their children. Lawyers for gay marriage supporters argued that no evidence existed to back those claims. Walker plans to schedule closing arguments in the case sometime soon."

A Bill Moyers Journal special on the Prop 8 challenge aired on Friday night.

Paul Katami, one of the plaintiffs in the Prop 8 case, wrote on his Facebook page of the Moyers special: "A MUST WATCH about our case. It's the best 45 minutes that will explain and deliver what we are doing and why."

Watch a preview, AFTER THE JUMP...

Watch a large portion of the show HERE.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. The Bill Moyers program on PBS was Excellent!

    Posted by: virgoboy | Mar 1, 2010 11:58:21 AM

  2. Bill is the best on televison- hands down.
    He is a national treasure.

    Posted by: Nick | Mar 1, 2010 12:30:25 PM

  3. I believe the entire episode is available at


    Posted by: Samuel | Mar 1, 2010 12:43:10 PM

  4. Are the defendants' lawyers that stupid? Post-trial briefs have to argue the law based upon the evidence admitted at trial. I don't remember there being any such evidence, unless I missed it or it was unreported, that would support these claims. This goes beyond desparate.

    Posted by: BobC562 | Mar 1, 2010 1:13:20 PM

  5. I am glad to see Bill Moyers finally coming around on this issue. He's a devout Christian and was, for many years, one of the few liberal stalwarts who did not endorse LGBT rights. Or even talk about it on the air for that matter.

    Posted by: John | Mar 1, 2010 3:30:09 PM

  6. I'm sorry -- but I need to correct you. This was not a special. It was just another standard episode. Source: I'm an associate producer for Bill Moyers Journal.

    Posted by: Julia | Mar 1, 2010 4:09:03 PM

  7. I hope I'm wrong, but watching that episode of "Billy Moyers' Journal", I really didn't get the impression that Moyers was a supporter of marriage equality. His repeated questions implying that the public has a right to vote up or down on the issue made him sound like a bigot.

    Posted by: Stuffed Animal | Mar 1, 2010 4:19:02 PM

  8. This was a great interview, Moyers asked the hard questions - and the facts speak for themselves.

    Posted by: Mike | Mar 1, 2010 4:36:16 PM

  9. The comments on his blog are quite amusing. A couple of real nutters in there.


    Posted by: BradK | Mar 1, 2010 5:11:23 PM

  10. Because the Focus on the Family types weren't invited, somebody had to bring up the opposing argument. Otherwise the show would be terribly dull and masturbatory.

    And I think Moyers asked that question repeatedly because the California Supreme Court said in 2009 - quite explicitly - that the people have the absolute right to define marriage as they see fit. Although this case is not a direct appeal of that decision, Olson and Boies are essentially seeking to overturn the California high court's rationale with the federal constitution's equal protection clause as the lynchpin.

    Posted by: John | Mar 1, 2010 5:37:52 PM

  11. To John 3/1 5:37
    You completely mischaracterize the California Supreme Court's Prop 8 decision. In the terms you use, the court said that the people can retain traditional nomenclature but only if there is an equal allocation of underlying rights. Civil Unions must = marriages with the exception of legally "irrelevant" nomenclature. I strongly disagree with their ruling as it historically has been proven untenable. But their ruling was essentially "equal protection means equal rights for all...except for the use of certain words." The Cal Supremes will soon rue this embarrassing decision.

    Posted by: Marco Luxe | Apr 19, 2010 2:58:10 PM

Post a comment


« «Photo: Lady Gaga's Lobster Chic« «