Just noting that I like how IANAL spells “I anal”. But shouldn’t that apply to the lawyers? We should say “I not anal.”
But then what about people who aren’t lawyers, but still want to be anal? 
[QUOTE=jsc1953]
If it was possible for there to be a factual answer to the question “what will happen if…”, I’d like to hear it. So everything in this thread has been speculation.
But let me rephrase my response more precisely: if the constitution is amended to ban gay marriages, I believe it unlikely that that will be the end of it. Will the new amendment be challenged? Quite likely. Would that challenge wind up in the Supreme Court? Seems reasonable. How will the court rule? Who knows.
[/QUOTE]
No, it doesn’t seem reasonable, for the reasons Otto correctly identifies in post #15. The issues involved rest on state law and do not invoke a federal question. A new action seeking federal DP or EP same-sex marriage could reach the Supreme Court, but it would have essentially zero involvement with a challenge to the validity of an amendment to the California constitution that sought to reverse the effects of the recent California state Supreme Court ruling.
[QUOTE=Bricker]
No, it doesn’t seem reasonable, for the reasons Otto correctly identifies in post #15.
[/QUOTE]
I think we’ll have to leave this at “wanna bet?”, and come back next year.
[QUOTE=jsc1953]
I think we’ll have to leave this at “wanna bet?”, and come back next year.
[/QUOTE]
Hardly. If there’s no federal question involved, SCOTUS cannot entertain jurisdiction; end of story. If they want a test case, they’ll pick one where jurisdiction is not in question and rule broadly.
[QUOTE=TJVM]
If I were a gay-marriage proponent in the state legislature, I might try to push through a law that says that any same-sex marriages invalidated by the constitutional amendment will be deemed immediately converted to domestic partnerships.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t think the California Legislature is back in session until after the November election, so this can not be done.