|
Associate Justice Kathryn Werdegar, however, felt compelled to point out that none of the previous Supreme Court cases that dealt with the amendment-versus-revision question in the context of minority rights. Minutes into Thursday's proceedings, the justices peppered a lawyer representing unwed same-sex couples with tough questions on why Proposition 8 represents a denial of fundamental rights when same-sex couples still have the legal benefits of marriage through domestic partnerships. "Is it your argument in this proceeding that the passage of Proposition 8 also took away, in addition to the label of marriage, the core of substantive rights of marriage this court outlined in its decision last year?" Kennard asked. "One of the core constitutional rights is to be treated with equality, dignity and respect," replied Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. In an unusual move, California Attorney General Jerry Brown sided with same-sex marriage advocates and refused to defend Proposition 8, which narrowly passed with 52 percent of the vote. Arguing on Brown's behalf, Senior Assistant Attorney General Christopher Krueger told the justices that prohibiting gays and lesbians to marry infringes on "inalienable" rights to liberty and privacy. The court also heard arguments on how Proposition 8, if upheld, affects the 18,000 same-sex marriages performed before it passed. Many of the justices did appear reluctant to invalidate the existing marriages. "Is that really fair to the people who depended on what this court said, upended their lives ... to throw that out?" asked Justice Chin. Starr, the dean of Pepperdine University law school, replied that the married couples had to have known "there was a swirl of uncertainty" surrounding their unions. George said if there was indeed uncertainty, the benefit of the doubt should go the newlyweds. Outside the courthouse, thousands of people chanted slogans and waved placards, with many watching the proceedings on a giant television screen erected across the street in front of San Francisco City Hall. Demonstrators were evenly split over the gay marriage issue and took turns drowning out each others chants after the hearing. Robin Tyler, who along with her wife, Diane Olson, brought one of the challenges heard by the justices, said afterward that gay and lesbians cannot afford to get discouraged, no matter how the court rules. "If this court rules to uphold Proposition 8, there will be a million of us on the streets marching," Tyler said. "We are not going away. We will not be invisible. We have had it." The Supreme Court has 90 days to issue a ruling.
[Associated
Press;
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
News | Sports | Business | Rural Review | Teaching & Learning | Home and Family | Tourism | Obituaries
Community |
Perspectives
|
Law & Courts |
Leisure Time
|
Spiritual Life |
Health & Fitness |
Teen Scene
Calendar
|
Letters to the Editor