POLS353F10+Court+3

[] This is the voting poll on proposition 8. (Rafidi F- 11/19/2011)

Proposition 8- section 7.5 of the Declaration of Rights The [|Public Policy Institute of California] released a poll in December 2008 to shed some light on who voted for Prop 8, especially in light of widespread claims that relatively heavy support among black voters is what pushed Prop 8 to victory. 2,003 voters were polled from November 5–16.[|[113]],[|[114]]
 * Facts about the Proposition and its Pros and Cons. (Rafid F-11/19/2011)**
 * 1) Only marriage between a man and women is valid or recognized in California
 * 2) Eliminates Rights of Same-Sex Couples to Marry- state wide proposition in California
 * 3) Approved on November 4, 2008- voters approved the measure
 * 4) August 4, 2010- Federal judge ruled that same sex marriage is illegal under the U.S constitution
 * 5) Before it passed, gay marriage was a constitutionally protected right in the California.
 * 6) On May 26, 2009- State Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the amendment and decided to hear federal lawsuits that proposition 8 is unconstitutional under the U.S constitution.
 * 7) Election results-
 * 8) 52.3 percent of the voters voted for Proposition 8 and 47.7 percent voted against.
 * 9) Background
 * 10) California first defined marriage as a state between a man and a women in 1977.
 * 11) California state Legislature passed a law defining marriage as a "personal relation arising out of a civil contract between a man and a woman."
 * 12) California law before 1959 prohibited interracial marriage and many other states until 1967
 * 13)  In 1967- United States Supreme Court ruled the prohibition of interracial marriage under the Racial Integrity Act of 1924 is unconstitutional in the case of Loving v. Virginia.
 * 14) In 2000- voters passed ballot initiative proposition 22 with a margin of 61%
 * 15)  Proposition 22 - only marriage between a man and a woman is recognized or valid in California
 * 16) Changed California's Family Code to formally define marriage in California between a man and a woman.
 * 17) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">It was a statuary change and not a constitutional change.
 * 18) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">In 2004- Mayor Gavin Newsom performed same sex marriage in his city, which lead to a decision on May 15, 2008 that struck down proposition 22 by the State Supreme Court in a 4-3 vote.
 * 19) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">Prior to May 2008, opponents for same sex marriage had already begun their efforts to qualify proposition 8.
 * 20) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">Their reasoning was because prop 22 was only a statute, and it was a subject to judicial review in a way that an amendment to the constitution would not be.
 * 21) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">When supporters of prop 8 submitted their measure to California Secretary of State in 2007, the ballot title was the "California Marriage Protection Act."
 * 22) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">At that time prop 22 was the governing law in the state and the term "marriage protection" appears to have meant "adding additional protection to the idea of one man-one woman marriage by enshrining it in the constitution, not just as a statue.
 * 23) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">How ever by the time that prop 8 got its original permission-to-circulate ballot title, and the time and time they turned in their signatures and became ballot certified, prop 22 no longer became the governing force.
 * 24) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">After prop 8 was certified for the ballot, it was revised by Attorney General Jerry Brown to accurately reflect the measure.
 * 25) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">Arguments for Prop 8
 * 26) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">It protects the free expression of religion, as supporters were worried that Gay rights advocates were not affording them the same courtesy- to live and believe as they please. The Gay/Lesbian community was/is demanding
 * 27) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">Supporters say that the support for prop 8 was not based on to attack on the gay lifestyle but is an effort to preserve what they hold as core values surrounding a vision of traditional marriage.
 * 28) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">It overturns 4 activists Judges in ruling unconstitutional of a ballot that was previously ruled by the people
 * 29) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">It protects our children from being taught in public schools that "same sex marriage" is as legitimate as marriage between two people of opposite gender.
 * 30) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">Protects religious universities, adoption providers, psychologists, doctors, and photographers from prosecutions for denying services to same-sex couples for any reason, including religious convictions.
 * 31) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">Argument against Prop 8
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">The California Constitution should guarantee the same freedoms and right to everyone.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">"Equal protection under the law is the foundation of American society."
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">"Traditional Marriage" is a misleading term. Various marriage traditions, since abolished, have included: only allowing members of the upper class or nobility to marry; having marriages arranged by families without the couple's consent; only allowing white people to marry; only allowing people of the same race to marry; and allowing one man to marry multiple women.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">Current statistics show roughly 50% of heterosexual marriages end in divorce. So-called "traditional marriage" is doing more to humiliate the institutional of marriage than any expansion of marriage could ever do.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">Voter initiatives to amend the constitutional should not be taken lightly; using them to take away rights from one group could open the door to voter initiatives to take away other rights, including religious freedoms and civil rights.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">The institution of marriage conveys dignity and respect to the lifetime commitment that a couple makes. Proposition 8 would deny lesbian and gay couples the opportunity to that same dignity and respect.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">"The freedom to marry is fundamental to our society, just like the freedoms of religion and speech."
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;"> When domestic partnerships are held out as an acceptable substitute for marriage, this is misleading. Domestic partnerships are not a substitute for marriage. [|[73]] The doctrine of "separate but equal" has been failed throughout American history.
 * 1) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">Who Voted for Prop 8
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">On a stand-alone question, 47% were in favor of same-sex marriage, 48% were opposed and 5% were unsure.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">85% of voters identifying themselves as evangelical or born-again Christians voted "yes".
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">Of non-evangelical Christians polled, 42% voted yes.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">77% of Republicans in the poll voted yes.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">65% of Democrats voted no.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">85% of John McCain supporters voted yes.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">30% of Barack Obama voters voted yes.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">61% of Latinos voted yes.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">57% of Latinos, Asians, and blacks combined voted yes.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">62% of those without a college degree voted yes.
 * <span style="direction: ltr; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;"> 74% of those who voted yes on Prop 8 considered the outcome of the vote to be "very important", while 59% of those who voted no attached the same level of importance to the outcome. [|[115]]
 * 1) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">Path of the ballot
 * 2) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">694,354 signatures were needed to qualify the measures for the ballot. About 1.1 million signatures were collected and turned in on April 24. In June, State Supreme Court announced that it qualified to appear in the November ballot.

<span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">(Maritza) <span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">[|COMPLAINT FOR CASE] (PERRY V. SCHWARZENEGGER)

<span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">[|DISTRICT CT. DECISION] MUST READ IT HAS ALOT OF IMP. INFO IN TERMS OF THE GOV. INTEREST, PROS OF MARRIAGE V DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS AND EXPERT WITNESS TESTIMONIES.

KENNEDY Kennedy will find PROP 8 Unconstitutional
 * Kennedy wrote the opinion for two cases that upheld gay rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and Due Process Clause
 * Romers v. Evans: The Amendment to the Colorado Constitution was unconstitutional, according to Kennedy because it targeted gays and there was no rational basis for the law. There is no legitimate state interest in preventing equal protection.
 * Lawrence v. Texas: Overturned laws prohibiting homosexual sodomy. This case also overturned Bowers v Hardwick.
 * The judge that wrote the opinion for the district court in //Perry// cited Kennedy's opinion in //Romers// seven times and //Lawrence// eight times.

THOMAS - Justice Thomas will UPHOLD PROP 8, but only due to the fact that these matters are up to the states. I will be using his short dissent from Lawrence v. Texas when he states:

//" I recognize that as a member of this Court I am not empowered to help petitioners and others similarly situated. My duty, rather, is to “decide cases ‘agreeably to the Constitution and laws of the United States.’ ” Id., at 530. And, just like Justice Stewart, I “can find [neither in the Bill of Rights nor any other part of the Constitution a] general right of privacy,” ibid., or as the Court terms it today, the “liberty of the person both in its spatial and more transcendent dimensions,” ante, at 1."// ( [|link to Thoma's dissent])

I will be arguing that marriage is not explicitly stated in the constitution therefore under the 10th amendment these issues should be left up to the state legislators or the public. Since California allows the people to amend the constitution through voter initiative it would mean that PROP 8 would remain in effect. I will also be using the precedent of Baker v. Nelson,which ruled that

//" The equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, like the due process clause, is not offended by the state's classification of persons authorized to marry. There is no irrational or invidious discrimination."//([|link to case])

The U.S supreme court issued a one sentence order denying the case due to lack of a substantial federal question. Because this reached the Supreme Court through mandatory appeal it set a binding precedent. The Supreme Court has never repudiated the Baker ruling therefore many believe that the lower courts should be bound by this decision. This ruling then really sets the precedent that a state could recognize heterosexual marriages ONLY, without offending the constitution, because of the lack of federal question. Even though Thomas had no part in Baker v. Nelson it promotes his argument that what cannot be found in the Constitution (meaning it lacked substantial federal question) is left up to the states. - Maria A.

Scalia: Justice Scalia will UPHOLD Prop 8 on moral basis. He is quoted stating, " If moral disapprobation of homosexual conduct is "no legitimate state interest" for purposes of proscribing that conduct...what justification could there possibly be for denying the benefits of marriage to homosexual couples exercising "the liberty protected by the Constitution"? Surely not the encouragement of procreation, since the sterile and the elderly are allowed to marry," in regards to the lower courts decision in //Perry//.

Roberts: Justice Roberts upholds Proposition 8 because it does not violate the First Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and Fourteen Amendment.

<span style="direction: ltr; font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11pt; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.375in; margin-top: 0px; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: middle;">Alito- Twenty-two years before the U.S. Supreme Court struck down sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas, Alito wrote in Princeton students' report that "no private sexual act betweenconsenting adults should be forbidden," and "discrimination against homosexuals in hiring should be forbidden." So I feel he can't rely on Scalia's dissent in Lawrence v. Texas.( []) (2nd sentence)

code Also, in his McDonald opinion he wrote that the 2nd amendment is incorporated under the 14th amendment as "(“[T]he American people have considered the handgun to be the quintessen-tial self-defense weapon”). Thus, we concluded, citizens must be permitted “to use [handguns] for the core lawful purpose of self-defense.” Heller makes it clear that this right is “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.” ([]) (P. 25.26,32)

So it would be that marriage is deeply rooted in this nation's history and a law abridging gay marriage is similar to a law abridging hand-gun ownership that violates the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment. Furthermore, he goes on to describe how post-civil war laws abridged African-Americans from owning firearms and other weapons and that this was later decided to violate the equal protection clause as well

code