# CA Supreme Court to Newsom: Stop allowing SSMs. Should he? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 11, 2004, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791 "2004-03-11T23:10:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2004, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/1 "2004-03-11T23:10:05Z")
[Cite](http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/8162806.htm). > [@](#): > > Posted on Thu, Mar. 11, 2004 > > The California Supreme Court ordered an immediate halt to gay marriages in San Francisco and said Thursday it would hear a case in May or June on the legality of such marriages. Should the civil disobedience continue, or is it time to let the courts do their job? I say the latter. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2004, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/2 "2004-03-11T23:19:32Z")
I think it’s time for the courts to do their thing. After all, wasn’t that the whole point, to force the courts to address the issue? ---
**Author:** ![askeptic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@askeptic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/askeptic)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2004, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/3 "2004-03-11T23:27:34Z")
I supported your campaign. I am a man who has been married to a wonderful woman for more than 15 years. I recently requested to serve as a “flower girl” for two women friends at a ceremony you were to preside over. I am a veteran and was decorated for combat actions in Desert Storm and for my service in the CANG during the Riots. I have engaged in heated argument over differences in philosophy with one of the Justices. Nevertheless, I would beg you to consider that now, with the youth of this country getting killed on a daily basis for no good reason, is not the time to instigate a constitutional crisis. ---
**Author:** ![Dogface](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Dogface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogface)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2004, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/4 "2004-03-11T23:36:12Z")
It’s time to let the court do its job. They have decided to hear the case, and fairly quickly, as these things go. Therefore, their stay is legitimate. ---
**Author:** ![ShoNuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f04885/32.png) [@ShoNuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShoNuff)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/5 "2004-03-12T00:26:05Z")
I think he should call in Ray Moore, and ask him about how to ignore the orders of judges. What a team! ---
**Author:** ![spectrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc29f/32.png) [@spectrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spectrum)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/6 "2004-03-12T01:00:16Z")
I would hope that Mayor Newsome would obey the court order. If he does not, he should be removed from office. I think what he’s done is great, but now there’s a process, and he should allow it to proceed. ---
**Author:** ![Stuffy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f17d59/32.png) [@Stuffy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stuffy)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/7 "2004-03-12T01:04:22Z")
I agreed with Newsom, but yes they should and have in fact stopped. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/8 "2004-03-12T03:44:18Z")
I agree, the best way to further the cause now is to let the court decide. It is clear that there is a more than equal chance that the justices will decide that the DOMA law in California is contrary to the state constitution. Otherwise, the court would have declared the marriages illegal outright. The fact that the justices are going to listen to arguments bodes well for SSM supporters. Civil disobedience has served its purpose, defying the court would only jeopardize the likelyhood of a positive outcome. ---
**Author:** ![II\_Gyan\_II](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/bbe5ce/32.png) [@II\_Gyan\_II](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/II_Gyan_II)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/9 "2004-03-12T07:10:45Z")
**Technically off-topic** … What would happen if in a married hetero couple, one of the partners decides to get a sex change? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/10 "2004-03-12T07:19:38Z")
As for the sex change, the state could (if it wanted) challenge a couple who instisted they were still married after one partner got an official sex change. Official in the sense of having his or her gender changed on official documents. My guess is that this is rare enough that it’s not really an issue. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 7:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/11 "2004-03-12T07:24:13Z")
> [@II Gyan II](#): > > **Technically off-topic** … > > What would happen if in a married hetero couple, one of the partners decides to get a sex change? One of them would be wicked suprised in bed, that’s what would happen… ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/12 "2004-03-12T14:27:26Z")
Can anybody offer up a link to the Supreme Court of California’s slip opinion and stay order? I am so far unsuccessful in finding one. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Billdo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/billdo/32/315_2.png) [@Billdo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Billdo)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/13 "2004-03-12T17:42:15Z")
Links to The two California Supreme Court Orders to Show Cause (containing ttemporary restraining orders requiring compliance with the statutory provisions of the Family Code) can be found on the [Findlaw Legal News Document Archives](http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/documents/) (the documents are PDF’s, so I won’t link them directly). ---
**Author:** ![suranyi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@suranyi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/suranyi)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/14 "2004-03-12T19:37:23Z")
Gavin Newsom is following the court order: “Newsom apologized to the couples who were turned away Thursday after he ordered the county clerk and recorder to stop issuing licenses at 2:45 p.m., and promised his office would contact the 2,688 couples with scheduled marriage appointments to inform them of the decision.” From here: > **[Newsom to peers: Read Constitution / Mayor sees courts upholding his...](https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Newsom-to-peers-Read-Constitution-Mayor-sees-2810566.php)** > > San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, on the heels of the state Supreme Court's decision... So he is not acting the same as Judge Moore did. Ed ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/15 "2004-03-12T19:44:27Z")
> [@suranyi](#): > > So he is not acting the same as Judge Moore did. He was insofar as he was ignoring the law to advance his personal agenda and – not coincidentally – get his face on the front page of some newspapers. I’m in favor of gay marriage, but Newsom has done a disservice to everyone except himself. He should be removed from office. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/16 "2004-03-12T20:15:03Z")
> [@Age Quod Agis](#): > > He was insofar as he was ignoring the law to advance his personal agenda and – not coincidentally – get his face on the front page of some newspapers. But Moore defied the court order he received, while Newsom is not. I actually was wondering if someone would care to advance the argument that Newsom \*\*should \*\* defy the court order. I think a case could be made to do so that could distinguish between that action and Judge Moore’s. But I do think it speaks to Newsom’s motives: If he was as interested in “the cause” as he was interested in self-promotion, he’d defy the court order and get himself arrested. That’s the real tactic of civil disobedience. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/17 "2004-03-12T20:47:51Z")
No, I disagree, John. Newsom is just not taking the ‘I’M RIGHT DAMN YOU’ approach. After all, look how far it got Moore. Far more effective is to force the issue (start issuing licenses), force it into the papers and nightly news, wait for the court to issue a cease and desist, then hope you win in the courts. Heck, you might win! And if that happens he’s liable to be the next Governor or somesuch. By forcing the issue you at least get the idea into play. And that’s worth all the adult temper tantrums in the world. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/18 "2004-03-12T20:57:07Z")
**JC** : You could be right. But my theory is that the backlash will cause the states to amend their constitutions, and shut the door. It’s happening as we speak in several states-- even MA is taking significant steps in that direction. The country is not ready for SSM. By forcing the issue, it will get bumped to the SCotUS. And I don’t think those guys are going to rule in favor of SSM. It’s a big gamble. And being a betting man, I’m putting odds against success. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/19 "2004-03-12T21:14:16Z")
As may be. The real push here is to get it to the Supreme Court, IMHO. Get the proper ruling there and screw the state courts. ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2004, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791/20 "2004-03-12T21:22:14Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > But Moore defied the court order he received, while Newsom is not. Both abused their office to defy the clear mandate of the law. In so doing, both defied the will of the majority. And thus, both ruled by fiat in their small enclaves. Both should have been removed from office _post haste_. I’m glad Newsom has decided to quit his self-aggrandizement, but you don’t get brownie points for merely ceasing unlawful activities. Abiding by the law is not exactly above and beyond the call of duty for a public servant. Or at least it shouldn’t be. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ca-supreme-court-to-newsom-stop-allowing-ssms-should-he/233791.md?page=2)