Prop 8 Decision on Tuesday...

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 5/22/09 at 1:36pm

Let's pray for the best...

http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid85513.asp
Updated On: 5/22/09 at 01:36 PM

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 5/22/09 at 1:43pm

My marriage is and will still be legal.

I'm just praying for everyone else.

[romantico]

Posted: 5/22/09 at 2:08pm

Even though Gavin Newsom denied this, I still thought it was interesting.

Confidential sources close to San Francisco City Hall told Towleroad's Corey Johnson that the California Supreme Court was prepared to release its opinion on Proposition 8 tomorrow, but decided to delay the ruling after a call from Mayor Gavin Newsom.

Newsom"Newsom reached out to the Supreme Court and asked them to hold off releasing their decision so it did not coincide with the White Night riots," said our source.

As mentioned earlier, a ruling Thursday would have fallen on the 30th anniversary of the San Francisco riots, which were set off when the court handed down the most lenient decision possible (voluntary manslaughter) against Dan White for the murders of supervisor Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone. The ensuing riots in San Francisco on May 21, 1979 caused hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage.

UPDATE: Towleroad received this tip from a highly credible source who did the interview on the condition that they remain anonymous. We have been working to get additional sources.

Gavin Newsom's office has issued a release denying the story.

San Francisco Supervisor Bevan Dufty spoke with Towleroad late this afternoon, saying he doubted the claims. Said Dufty: "It is implausible if not impossible to imagine that the Mayor could reach out to the California Supreme Court. Any thinking person would know that he would be radioactive to the justices given his leadership on the issue. His father is a retired federal judge. The Mayor's courage on this issue is unimpeachable. He would not intrude in what we've been waiting for."

http://www.towleroad.com/2009/05/exclusive-sf-mayor-gavin-newsom-asked-court-to-delay-prop-8-ruling.html

[BudFrump23]

Posted: 5/22/09 at 3:38pm

Here's hoping that the court makes the right (but not wing) decision!

[romantico]

Posted: 5/22/09 at 5:19pm

SO, have they already voted and will announce on Tuesday or will they vote and then announce on Tuesday?If they already know the outcome, why not release the verdict on the Friday before a holiday?

[ZONEACE]

Posted: 5/22/09 at 6:18pm

This isn't a "take out the trash day" story. that's why.

[SonofMammaMiaSam]

Posted: 5/22/09 at 6:32pm

They have to rule by June 1. They normally rule on Tues. and Thurs. with notice. No great suprise here as to the timing.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/22/09 at 7:30pm

I'm optimistic.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 5/22/09 at 8:00pm

And I'm getting emails about rallys the night of the decision.

Why are they not the night BEFORE so that maybe we can make an impact. Why wait until AFTER? So we can stand around and complain, then get mad, then riot.


I've got my taser and foam mace.

Posted: 5/22/09 at 8:26pm

It's Harvey Milk's birthday today. A press release announcing the overturning of prop 8 would have been a great thing on a day like that. A release of a decision upholding prop. 8 might have caused protests/riots thru the long week-end. I know the court doesn't concern itself with that stuff, but still...makes you think.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 5/22/09 at 8:32pm

It's also the anniversary of the court decision in Harvey's murder trial.

There's a rumor that's going around that Gavin Newsom asked for them to announce the decision on Tuesday so their wouldn't be the same "White Night Riots"...

[romantico]

Posted: 5/22/09 at 8:36pm

I am not optimistic.I hope I am wrong but I trust my gut.The state of California let us down once already.

http://unitethefight.blogspot.com/2009/05/ca-supreme-court-to-rule-on-prop-8_22.html

[romantico]

Posted: 5/25/09 at 6:21pm

In California, 49% oppose gay marriage. 47% support it (new SurveyUSA poll)

Do you think same-sex couples should? Or should not? be allowed to marry in California?

47% should
49% should not
4% not sure

Furthermore, 49% want "Proposition 8" to remain law. 38% want it overturned. 12% are not sure.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=5a8ab8b0-ef7a-43f7-b7d9-3b3240c48051


Five years, thousands of weddings, dozens of lawsuits, and one tense referendum after gay couples were first allowed to tie the knot in California, the state's Supreme Court is poised to once more decide their future.

A panel of seven judges will announce tomorrow whether Proposition Eight, a same-sex marriage ban approved by a narrow majority of voters in November, should now be tossed out because of claims that it was put to the ballot improperly. The court, which has been considering the matter since March, will also reveal the fate of 18,000 couples who married in a five-month period last year when same-sex weddings were allowed. They have been in legal limbo since.

Most experts expect existing marriages to be upheld, but say the court is unlikely to contravene the democratically expressed wish of a slim majority of Californians by overturning Proposition Eight, which was approved by 52 per cent of voters.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/gay-marriage-ban-hangs-in-the-balance-1690419.html

Updated On: 5/25/09 at 06:21 PM

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 5/25/09 at 6:38pm

I'll be posting from the riots and then from jail.

[romantico]

Posted: 5/25/09 at 10:37pm

Check this link at 10:00 a.m. PST tomorrow, 7:00 a.m. Eastern.

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme /

The full copy of the opinion will be available here:

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions /

Proposition 8 Cases

Background

California voters approved Proposition 8, a state ballot initiative, at the November 4, 2008, statewide election. Proposition 8 added a new section to the state Constitution which provides that "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." The day after the election, three lawsuits challenging Prop. 8 were filed directly in the California Supreme Court.

On November 19, 2008, the Supreme Court agreed to hear those cases. The court directed the parties to brief and argue the following issues:
(1) Is Proposition 8 invalid because it constitutes a revision of, rather than an amendment to, the California Constitution?
(2) Does Proposition 8 violate the separation of powers doctrine under the California Constitution?
(3) If Proposition 8 is not unconstitutional, what is its effect, if any, on the marriages of same-sex couples performed before the adoption of Proposition 8?

In the order accepting the cases for review, the Supreme Court also denied a request to stay the operation of Proposition 8 pending the court's resolution of the cases, granted the motion of the official proponents of Proposition 8 to intervene in the action, and established an expedited briefing schedule. Briefing in the Supreme Court was completed on January 21, 2009. All briefs are available online on the Prop 8 page

[ZONEACE]

Posted: 5/26/09 at 12:17am

I'll be posting from the riots and then from jail.

Don't forget to ask a friend to hold your hoop earrings, weave and heels.

[roquat]

Posted: 5/26/09 at 1:41am

I know nothing about protests, riots, or complex politico/legal maneuverings. It seems to me that if Prop 8 is upheld, the most effective way to protest is to live as if it hadn't been upheld. If you're in a long-term, committed same-sex relationship, speak of your husband or wife as just that--not boyfriend/girlfriend, partner, or any derivative thereof. When you fill out your tax forms, list yourself as "Married" and apply for the related tax benefits, and jam the I.R.S. with more paperwork than even it can handle.

They can't stop us from getting married, government recognition or no. Not if it's the "marriage of true minds" that Alexander Pope wrote of.

And there's one other thing the gay-marriage movement needs--a theme song. May I suggest "Stand By Me"?

[adamgreer]

Posted: 5/26/09 at 6:46am

Check this link at 10:00 a.m. PST tomorrow, 7:00 a.m. Eastern.

Wouldn't it be 1 PM, EST? If it's being released at 10 AM, PST, that would be 1 PM on the coast. 7 AM EST is 4 AM PST.

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 5/26/09 at 6:53am

"Why are they [the protests] not the night BEFORE so that maybe we can make an impact. Why wait until AFTER? So we can stand around and complain, then get mad, then riot."

It is not as if the justices are going to wake up this morning, get dressed in their robes and go down to the courthouse and cast a vote. The decision has been made and written, as have the dissents. They will simply be announced and published this morning. Any demonstrations last night would not have made one lick of difference. Hopefully the "protests" planned for today and tonight will actually be big old street party celebrations.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/26/09 at 7:24am

I'm still feeling optimistic.

[madbrian]

Posted: 5/26/09 at 8:27am

PJ's optimism worries me.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 5/26/09 at 8:30am

why are the white people rioting? and what happened to the headlines i read touting obama's supremem court pick today? ah, it's at 10:15.

Updated On: 5/26/09 at 08:30 AM

[tazber]

Posted: 5/26/09 at 8:39am

My guess:

It won't be overturned.
As for the couples already married, while their union won't become null and void, they will be marginalized to a red-tape quagmire having to prove their marriage is legal everytime they apply for benefits.

[singinsilly]

Posted: 5/26/09 at 8:44am

::crosses fingers::

[TulitaPepsi]

Posted: 5/26/09 at 9:33am

I feel the same as tazber. It'll be "the people have spoken (even if they voted to take away civil rights)".

I'm VERY pessimistic. But boy, would I love to be proven wrong on this.