BREAKING: Ninth Circuit Court Sends Prop 8 To State Supreme Court On "Standing"

[FreeState]

http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2011/01/breaking-prop-8-decision-from-ninth-circuit-coming-in-15-minutes.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+GoodAsYou+%28Good+As+You%29

BREAKING: Prop 8 decision from Ninth Circuit coming in 15 minutes (written at 1:45PM Eastern)

At least that's the message that just dropped into our Inbox. Stay tuned.

***

**UPDATE: Not sure if the opinion will be posted on the 9th Circuit's Perry miscrosite. But here it is, just in case.

We'll of course embed the full opinion here at the first available opp.

***

*Wait, the case is going back to the CA Supreme Court? Read with me and Help me figure it out:

PDF at link is order having SUpreme Court of CA rule weather state law gives standing to Pro-Prop 8 lawyers and rendering the case dead... (thats how Im reading it anyway)

-----

Coverage from Joe.My.God:

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2011/01/breaking-ninth-circuit-court-sends-prop.html

BREAKING: Ninth Circuit Court Sends Prop 8 To State Supreme Court On "Standing"
Here's the ruling. Analysis and reactions shortly.
Labels: California, Ninth Circuit Court., Proposition 8

-----

Update from Mainstream News:

http://www.kron4.com/News/ArticleView/tabid/298/smid/1126/ArticleID/7818/reftab/64/t/Ninth%20Circuit%20Asks%20California%20Supreme%20Court%20for%20Help%20in%20Determining%20Who%20Can%20Appeal%20Prop%208/Default.aspx

SAN FRANCISCO (KRON) -- The three judge panel deciding the constitutionality of Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage in California, is asking for help from the U.S. Supreme Court.

Ninth Circuit justices Stephen Reinhardt, Michael Hawkins, and Randy Smith say they need direction from California's high court in determining who has standing to appeal a lower court's ruling throwing out Prop 8.

"Because we cannot consider this important constitutional question unless the appellants before us have standing to raise it, and in light of Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43 (1997) (“Arizonans”), it is critical that we be advised of the rights under California law of the official proponents of an initiative measure to defend the constitutionality of that measure upon its adoption by the People when the state officers charged with the laws’ enforcement, including the Attorney General, refuse to provide such a defense or appeal a judgment declaring the measure unconstitutional," the Ninth Circuit justices wrote. "As we are aware of no controlling state precedent on this precise question, we respectfully ask the Supreme Court of California to exercise its discretion to accept and decide the certified question below."

State officials have refused to appeal Judge Robert Walker's decision that Proposition Eight is unconstitutional. Supporter of the campaign to pass Prop 8 appealed the judge's decision to the Ninth Circuit. The justices hear oral arguments on the matter in early December.

Whatever the Ninth Circuit decides, it seems likely the case will eventually end up before the United States Supreme Court.

[FreeState]

1. Bumping because this is huge news... n/t

[racaulk]

2. I'm not sure what it all means yet, but this is huge news.

K&R!

[FreeState]

3. The Court denied Imperial County standing and has asked the State to determin if Yes on 8 has it n/t

[racaulk]

4. Ah, gotcha!

I skimmed over the ruling and that's what I thought had happened, but I wasn't sure. Thanks for spelling it out in plain English for me.

Another question, though. If the CA State Supreme Court determines that the Prop 8 proponents do have standing to appeal, will the 9th Circuit then take up the case again?

[pinto]

7. Seems to be the case.

:shrug:

[pinto]

5. Seems that they are asking for clarification on whether or not Pro-8

backers (private citizens) have the legal right to appeal under CA law after the Governor and AG declined to defend Prop 8 or appeal. i.e., Do Pro 8 individuals essentially have a right to act in lieu of the State. 9th Circuit is apparently unsure of it's legal standing in the matter at this point. State / Federal issues. :shrug:

[FreeState]

8. Yes - I think they are just covering their butts by asking

They have no standing, but the Yes on 8 claimed that the state law gives them standing, so the Court IMO is just being diligent in asking.

[pinto]

10. Smart move, imo, if they are looking to close a potential legal loophole ahead of time.

[xchrom]

6. i'm really hating the initiative process.

the supremes in cali have ruled in favor of the initiative process before -- it's the 'voice' of the People and given precedence.

and it looks like it's questioning the governor's decision not to litigate on behalf of prop 8.

[pinto]

9. Agree. And the strong history of CA judicial support for the process clearly has the 9th tied up.

It's really become abused in practice though.