Prop 8 Proponents Appeal Case to the Supreme Court

A long-expected move. Buzzfeed's Chris Geidner has the details:

Prop8Specifically, they ask the court in a filing today to decide "Whether the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the State of California from defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman."

Arguing that "[u]nique recognition of a unique relationship in no way disapproves or dishonors other relationships that the State has chosen to recognize differently," the Proposition 8 proponents ask the court to take the case to correct the "manifest errors" of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and "to return to the People themselves this important and sensitive issue."

Opponents of Proposition 8 filed the lawsuit challenging the 2008 ballot measure in 2009. The group behind the challenge, the American Foundation for Equal Rights, succeeded at the trial and appeals-court level. They and the state defendants will now have 30 days to respond to the filing, called a petition for a writ of certiorari, before the Supreme Court decides after its summer recess whether it will take the case.

More here.


  1. Icebloo says

    I hope I am wrong but I really believe the corrupt, right wing biased Supreme Court will rule against gay marriage. The whole US judicial system is broken. Our judicial system is an embarrassment. We need to scrap it all and start again.

    We are not a democracy when big money is buying the White House for cun#s like Romney and George W Bush. We are no better than China or Russia and it’s the Supreme Court that is allowing this to happen. They all need firing.

  2. Anthony says

    I really hope the court decides not to take the case. If they do then it’s obvious this is 100 percent politics. The opinion was written basically to make it a state issue, and I’m sick of waiting here in Cali to get married.

  3. Mark says

    Interestingly they are only asking the whether the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment prohibits the State of California from defining marriage as a union between a man and women.

    I think this is a very odd way to appeal the decision because 1) this point was never argued in any of the lower court proceedings and 2) it ignores almost all the facts of the case including how Prop 8 actually was passed.

    I personally think they are trying to stretch the argument to try and win based on the concept that no other court has ever found a federal constitutional right to same sex marriage. I think this this hail mary pass and it gives the SCOTUS a lot more reason to deny review.

    However, I wonder if they are a*hole enough to present a unique question to the court to try and force the case back to the district level?! Maybe Ari can answer…

    We will see – probably in the September to October time frame.

  4. Beef and Fur says

    How are they appealing this question when it wasn’t part of the original case or the appeal?

  5. J Ascher says

    Perhaps the point of raising the 14th Amendment issue at this late date is to get the case rejected for hearing and limit the “damage” as the appellants see it, to California.

  6. says

    “[u]nique recognition of a unique relationship in no way disapproves or dishonors other relationships that the State has chosen to recognize differently”

    If that’s the case, then I say we call the “marriage” of two bigots “Bigotmony!”

  7. Beef and Fur says

    @ J Ascher

    Good point. It’s an odd development and will be interesting to find out what their motivation is behind this.

  8. says

    Am I isolated or is their word enough to suggest even they know they can’t win, and want to limit this to just California?

  9. says

    @ J Ascher

    I JUST read what you wrote, virtually exactly to what I wrote, now. I believe that is a very probable idea. They must have picked and chosen their battle, and mustered California gay marriage as a foregone conclusion. But also wanted to limit that privilige to just California.

  10. Alexa says

    I don’t know, I’m getting a positive feeling about this. I really am. It may not be a decision that affects nation wide marriage equality, but as far as California is concerned….I have a feeling they will become number 9.

  11. John D says

    JP: Yes, if SCOTUS denies cert, the ruling of the Appeals Court stands and the stay of judgment expires. At that point, Prop 8 is invalidated.

  12. anon says

    NO, the ninth ruled that prop 8 violated the 14th amendment as “Therefore, Proposition 8 “violates the Equal Protection Clause” of the 14th Amendment.”

    Thus, the case was properly presented to the SC. Had the issue been outside the ruling, the SC would have simply remanded case back to the ninth for clarification.

  13. Mark says

    Anon – but that isn’t what they are asking the SCOTUS – they are asking if the California can define marriage or whether it violates the 14th Amendment – that is different. No where did the concept of whether a state can define marriage ever get decided.

  14. Justin says

    The entire case has always been about the 14th Amendment. All of the arguments in the case derive from the 14th Amendment’s due process and equal protection clauses. There is absolutely nothing new in the question presented by this cert petition. Take it from a lawyer who’s followed this case since the beginning.

  15. Stupid says

    Now this is getting ridiculous – all this back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. I can’t believe that four years later, they still haven’t thrown this stupid Prop 8 shyt out the window. California definitely isn’t as hip and liberal and laid back as they like to think.