Today the California Supreme Court ruled on the Ninth Circuit's request of whether the people of California can retain private legal counsel to defend the people's referendum when their state officials charged with that duty refused to do. This question involved whether Proposition 8 could be defended at all, because California's highest officials would not. The Court issued this reponse:
"...We respond to the question posed by the Ninth Circuit in the affirmative. In a postelection challenge to a voter-approved initiative measure, the official proponents of the initiative are authorized under California law to appear and assert the state's interest in the initiative's validity and to appeal a judgment invalidating the measure when the public officials who ordinarily defend the measure or appeal such a judgment decline to do so."
The New York Times article analyzing this ruling is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/18/us/backers-of-proposition-8-can-challenge-court-ruling.html?_r=1&hp.
Thanks to the public interest law firms who have taken the defense of Proposition 8, and the many lawyers (several of whom are Regent Law graduates) defending marriage.
Though I ideologically disagree with the California Supreme Court. I've developed a respect for them after reading a number of decisions. This one is no exception. I doubt they like the idea of someone defending the amendment (as they support the idea of legalizing gay marriage). But nonetheless their decision is based on law and not personal opinions. And even though its abominable that the California government is unwilling to defend the will of their people, it's probably for the best. Now someone who believes in the amendment can properly defend it.
ReplyDelete