California Supreme Court Sets Prop 8 Case Hearing for September 6

A date has been set for the next hearing in the Prop 8 case, according to the American Foundation for Equal Rights:

Afer Today the Supreme Court of California announced that the hearing date for Perry v. Brown will be on Tuesday, September 6, 2011 at 10:00AM. The date announced is the very first day of the court’s fall calendar. The court will hear oral arguments on a question of whether under state law proponents of initiatives have standing to defend their initiatives when they are challenged in court.  The question was certified to them by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit earlier this year.

Said Board President Chad Griffin:

"I am very pleased that the Supreme Court of California calendared our case for the first day of their fall session.  The governor and attorney general of California – and the United States District Court – all have found Proposition 8 unconstitutional.  I am confident that the California Supreme Court will swiftly reach a decision on this question, and that this nation is now one step closer to seeing the dark walls of discrimination finally crumble.”

Another hearing has been set as well. by the the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. who will hear a motion from AFER that the videotapes of the January 2010 trial be made available to the public. That hearing is set for August 29.


  1. me says

    finally. the s-l-o-w pace of the judicial system. on one hand, it’s too bad justice vaughn put a stay on same sex marriage; on the other hand, it probably would have been stayed by the district court anyway like they did with the DADT when the San Diego judge overturned it. It seems they refrain from overturning those decisions UNLESS it has to do with gay rights.

  2. Tyler says

    @me: walker refused to stay his opinion and it was stayed by the court of appeals. If the court of appeals hadn’t stayed it, it is highly likely that the supreme court would have done so, which could have created a bad result prematurely.

    In other news, will Goodwin Liu’s confirmation on August 31 come in time for him to sit in this case? I hope so.

  3. says

    Someone needs to tell the courts its ok to be Takei and married…

    On a serious note though hopefully one day soon the right thing will be done for good.

  4. Zlick says

    Yes, I’d hate to see the same mix of judges who ruled Californians can do anything they like to their Constitution. Thinking along those lines can lead to the notion that Californians can step in for their Attorney General whenever they feel like it.

    Concerns for the loopy logic of our state’s Supreme Court aside, I’m glad a hearing on this sideshow is finally at hand. What a joke it’s been for the Ninth Circuit to allow this absurd delay to their declared fast-tracking of this case.

    In fact, the lack of guts by every judicial panel to to hear this matter since Prop 8 passed has been sickening. Despite whatever the California Supremes rule on the standing of the proponents in state court, that still doesn’t touch the federal standing issue which the Ninth could have ruled on nearly a year ago. And the California Supremes were quite gutless themselves when they allowed carve-outs to our Constitution’s equal protection guarantees to be considered mere revisions to our Constitution. Deplorable lack of judicial fortitude all around. Only Judge Walker, acting alone, seems to have had the balls it takes to mete out true justice.

  5. Tyler says

    @ zlick: It’s not necessarily the case that the best ruling here is lack of standing to defend initiatives. Given the history of the panel that is hearing the case, and the questions they asked at oral argument last December, I’d say there’s probably a 90% chance that the Ninth Circuit affirms Judge Walker on the merits. If there’s no standing, on the other hand, it’s limited to California. Not only that, but if there’s ever a good initiative in the future that a governor fails to defend, we’re screwed.

  6. BobN says

    Why does it always feel like the courts are timing the steps to favor the GOP in the election cycle?

  7. me says

    @Tyler, thanks for that, I wasn’t aware. Looks like you’re half right — Judge Walker did stay his ruling until the District Court looked it over (until August 18, 2010) , but the District Court then further stayed it pending their review. It’s maddening how immoral the justices are.