The 9th Circuit Court has upheld the ruling by U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker that California’s Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.
The Ninth Circuit upheld a liberal viewpoint?! I am shocked! 
I think most people thought they would, but I believe the real idea is to get this to the Supreme Court. I don’t see why gay people can’t marry, anyway I hope that it goes to the SCOTUS soon and it’s settled. Of course it’ll take forever in an election year and in the meantime there will be a stay on marriages in California.
Fabulous!
What I haven’t been able to find out yet is whether or not the current stay on same-sex marriage will be upheld. Is it possible that we’ll actually get more same-sex marriages while this works its way up to SCOTUS (or possibly the full 9th Circuit panel)?
ETA: Nevermind – found the answer to my own question.
“The court said gay marriages cannot resume in the state until the deadline passes for Proposition 8 sponsors to appeal to a larger panel of the 9th Circuit. If such an appeal is filed, gay marriages will remain on hold until it’s resolved.”
Golly, I wonder if they’ll appeal.
The fact that this was predicted, and will surely be appealed, doesn’t make it any less worthy of celebration!
I’m with you. My husband and I both cheered the decision. I’m hoping it will give encouragement to those of us in Minnesota and elsewhere who will be voting on (and voting down, dammit) a constitutional marriage amendment in 2012.
I’m disappointed. Judge Walker’s original ruling set out a strong, multifaceted argument for a constitutional right to marriage, rejecting Prop. 8 on both due process and equal protection grounds, addressing both rational basis and suspect classification. The 9th Circuit’s ruling is the narrowest and weakest possible, relying solely on the precedent of Romer v. Evans, that fundamental rights cannot, under the U.S. Constitution, be stripped from those who already have them. Judge Reinhardt has almost singlehandedly reduced this precedent to one that will never be asserted outside of California, and will probably never be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
But, it pretty well assures marriage for gays in California, so there’s that.
I think the decision is, in the long run, actually better for marriage equality this way. As you say, it almost assures marriage equality in CA, which is a huge state just by itself. If the (broader) issue went to the Supreme Court today, I think the outcome would be pretty iffy, even considering that the pro-equality argument has been crafted with Justice Kennedy in mind. If this issue can be put off on a national level for (say) 10 years, it might increase the chance that SCOTUS rules for marriage equality. This isn’t entirely assured–if a Republican president in the meantime appoints more conservative justices, it could actually go the other direction–but I think that in general, the longer this can be put off, the more likely supporters of marriage equality will succeed. Think about it–the supporters of Prop 8 probably WANT this to go to SCOTUS–because this is their only chance to stop (or delay) gay marriage. They don’t want to wait because time is slipping away from them, so it’s now or never.
I am so sick of this is it/isn’t it thing. I don’t really have an opinoin on it either way, so let’s get it to the Supreme Court and decide once and for all. It’s ridiculous to have it in some states but not others.