So IANAL, but I am curious about the legal foundations of such a change. Apparently the entire proposed change is this:
Now, I realize how a constitutional amendment is a constitutional amendment and little can be done about it other than another constitutional amendment, but I am wondering how the very act of passing this constitutional amendment was constitutional based on section 9:
Now, this is probably not an ex post facto law, but is this not a law impairing the obligation of contracts? Wouldn’t proposition 8 have to have a provision about previously established marriage contracts to be a passable amendment under section 9? Or am I missing something that prevents section 9 from applying to initiatives amending the constitution?