CA Supreme Court Oral Arguments - 3/5/9 9a-12p PST

  • metta

    Posts: 39075

    Mar 05, 2009 9:13 AM GMT

    45403026.jpg


    [quote]
    The California Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Thursday, March 5, 2009, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., in three cases challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8, a statewide ballot initiative that was passed by a majority of California voters in November 2008.

    The California Channel will broadcast this event live via your local cable provider and on our website*.
    [/quote]


    http://www.calchannel.com/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 2:34 PM GMT
    Help by signing the HRC petition here:

    http://www.hrc.org/endthelies/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 2:37 PM GMT
    Cowboiway saidHelp by signing the HRC petition here:

    http://www.hrc.org/endthelies/

    Done.

  • metta

    Posts: 39075

    Mar 05, 2009 4:29 PM GMT

    It is about to begin:
    http://www.calchannel.com/

    http://www.calchannel.com/channel/live/

    funny-pictures-cat-has-unraveled-all-you
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 4:41 PM GMT
    thanks mette, how our message hasn't fallen on deaf ears..seams only us old timers are here supporting it and you
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 4:48 PM GMT
    I am trying to watch, but I have a Dr's appt in an hour icon_cry.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 5:02 PM GMT
    It just started and streaming live

    http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/livenow?id=6692754
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 5:13 PM GMT
    CowboiwayHelp by signing the HRC petition here:


    http://www.hrc.org/endthelies

    Done as well and watching the Live Feed...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 5:22 PM GMT
    Cowboiway saidHelp by signing the HRC petition here:

    http://www.hrc.org/endthelies/


    Signed and passed along icon_biggrin.gif.
  • Anto

    Posts: 2035

    Mar 05, 2009 5:26 PM GMT
    If you can't get the California website stream to work due to it being overloaded, right now this link is working for live stream viewing:

    http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/livenow?id=6692754
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 8:40 PM GMT
    May I just say that I think the court seemed to be thinking about upholding Prop 8, but retaining the legal status of the same-sex marriages performed during the 5 months while the Court's rule remained legal?

    And may I say that I saw they felt more strongly about retaining the rights of those married couples than of actually retaining Prop 8? With that I mean that, yes, I think they drilled the Attorney General with questions in a way they didn't with Mr. Starr (who is, I believe, a real-life version of Al Pacino in The Devil's Advocate), but they seemed to be more scared of the consequences of overturning the will of the people than actually convinced by the validity of Prop 8 itself (ie, on ethical grounds).

    It was also funny/disheartening to hear the judges admit that this was the first time they had to rule on something like this ("first impression" was the term), but at the same time continuously referring back to dozens of previous cases and court rules, from whether women could be bartenders (yes, there was a court case on that!) to death penalty to the right to fish.

    If we can't compare those cases with this particular one, then let's not.

    And if it isn't common sensical to understand that this is the will of the majority overturning a court ruling, which we are all perfectly able to do under this Constitution, BUT that in so doing THEY VOTED ON AN AMENDMENT/REVISION THAT DIDN'T APPLY TO THEM (so they didn't have to think about their consequences, so they didn't have to be properly informed, so... etc), and that IT DID SINGLE OUT A SUSPECT CLASS as a minority not fit from a fundamental right such as the liberty to marry, then what else is going to turn the Court around?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 8:44 PM GMT
    Now we wait
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 8:46 PM GMT
    If these judges vote to uphold prop 8 is this the end? Not being a lawyer I wouldn't know.

    However if they uphold prop 8 and contend this is a matter of right for minorities, could this be the case that goes before the US Sepreme court? The one that over turn all the state laws?

    Just thinking out loud while we wait for thier answer.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 9:01 PM GMT
    The chances that the California Surpreme court will over turn Prop 8 is slim to none. Justice Kennard is leaning toward upholding Prop * which is the will of the majority of voters in California. This is the same judge that voted against the prohibitions of same marriagelast year...go figure.

    I will be shocked if it's over-turned.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 9:02 PM GMT
    will they give an anwser today???
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 9:05 PM GMT
    not sure earliest will be tomorrow at the very latest sometime next week.
    It's a nail biter for sure.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 9:05 PM GMT
    90 days to announce thier decission
  • EricLA

    Posts: 3461

    Mar 05, 2009 9:08 PM GMT
    The court has 90 days to announce it's decision. In general these things don't happen very early, but then the court did speed the process on hearing these arguments. Still, I'd be surprised if we heard something in days rather than several weeks.

    Initial signs don't seem to be good.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 9:13 PM GMT
    Give what's at steak I doubt if we would have to wait a fully 90 days. I give it a week or two. Before we find out that prop 8 will not be over turned.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 9:36 PM GMT
    Cowboiway saidIf these judges vote to uphold prop 8 is this the end? Not being a lawyer I wouldn't know.


    No. Pro-gay marriage men and women can perfectly well gather enough signatures to propose a new Prop that will allow same-sex couples to marry. So basically it would be the same process but in reverse. If that Prop were to win, then Prop 8 would be disregarded.

    Precisely why I doubt the Court will want to spend their power on something that can be "democratically" and "peacefully" passed by voters themselves in 4 or 5 years.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 9:43 PM GMT
    I dont think the judges are going to overturn it. It will need to go before the people again for a vote.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 9:44 PM GMT
    I wonder if there will be riots if it is upheld.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 9:45 PM GMT
    Caslon9000 saidI wonder if there will be riots if it is upheld.


    Yup, and rightfully so
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 9:46 PM GMT
    Cowboiway saidIf these judges vote to uphold prop 8 is this the end? Not being a lawyer I wouldn't know. .


    The narrow issue to be decided by the California Supreme Court is whether Prop 8 "amends" or "revises" the state constitution. An "amendment" may be done by referendum, as in Prop 8, but a "revision" is considered a fundamental change and must be done by a 3/4 vote of the state legislature. This is purely a question of a state court interpreting state law. The U.S. Supreme Court usually defers to state courts on things like this and won't reverse them unless it thinks some ultra-fundamental right is involved. The Supremes probably won't do that in this case because the ostensible issue is the legal distinction between "amending" and "revising," not the rights of gay people.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 05, 2009 9:51 PM GMT
    no because there are preparing a ballot intitive to over turn prop 8. Where are they going to riot in West Hollywood. Trust me if you live in Los Angeles you that the LA COUNTY SHERRIF's are nothing nice.

    West Hollywood is tooo close to Beverly Hills trust me it ain't happening and it would be crushed with quickness! I can't see sissies burning dorn and looting West Hollywood at best their will be protest marches.

    A full scale riot I think not!

    I'm native of Los Angeles I know my town. There is a reason why the LA riots never went past the Beverly Center!