ARS on Twitter
RSS
California State Supreme Court to decide whether governing document means anything….
Posted by Duncan on November 20th, 2008
Now, I know I am not a lawyer and don’t contemplate the definition of “is” quite like our 42nd President, but this Proposition 8 issue in California is starting to blow my lil mind.
Propostition 8 got a thumbs up from 52% of Californians vs. 48%, a percentage difference that I believe The Messiah won the popular vote for the Executive. Proposition 8 amended the Californian state constitution in order to define a marriage as being solely between a man and a woman in response to the California Supreme Court making/creating “civil rights” out of whole cloth based on said constitution.
So now the California Supreme court, who decides cases based on their governing document, the State Constitution of California, is deciding whether or not the amendment itself is constitutional?
“The California Supreme Court today denied requests to stay the enforcement or implementation of Proposition 8, and at the same time agreed to decide several issues arising out of the passage of Proposition 8.
“The court’s order, issued in the first three cases that had been filed directly in the state’s highest court challenging the validity of Proposition 8, directed the parties to brief and argue three issues:
(1) Is Proposition 8 invalid because it constitutes a revision of, rather than an amendment to, the California Constitution?
(2) Does Proposition 8 violate the separation-of-powers doctrine under the California Constitution?
(3) If Proposition 8 is not unconstitutional, what is its effect, if any, on the marriages of same-sex couples performed before the adoption of Proposition 8?”
Well isn’t that convenient.
Here is the definition of revised via Merriam-Websters:
1 a: to look over again in order to correct or improve
bBritish : to study again : review2 a: to make a new, amended, improved, or up-to-date version of b: to provide with a new taxonomic arrangement
And here is the definition of amend via the same:
1: to put right ; especially : to make emendations in (as a text)2 a: to change or modify for the better : improve
b: to alter especially in phraseology ; especially : to alter formally by modification, deletion, or addition
Maybe I am not seeing it. I guess if they say it was a “revision” instead of an “amendment”, and since the Constitution can only be “amended” and not “revised”, then Prop 8 is unconstitutional. Semantics people. Like “fetus” vs “baby”. A rose by another other name and all.
The irony is that, from what I can tell, Proposition 8 was properly created and voted on as to amend the State Constitution in accordance with the Constitution’s amendment rules. If that is so, and the California Supreme Court uses the State Constitution in order to decide cases, and the Constitution has been amended, how can they decide AGAINST a lawful amendment. Would that not make the amendment process pretty much a moot point since those who are bound by it can simply nullify the end product?
Seems like to me the maniacs lunatics are in charge of the asylum at this point?
Hat-tip to Wizbang.
November 20th, 2008 at 10:32 pm
Why was it put up for vote in the first place then? If the Cali courts can override the people, uh peons, no one should bother voting.
After all, the courts’ job is to stick up for small minority which seeks to make as much news and noise as possible. Someone has to look out for their interests, right?
November 20th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
(This comment expanded such that I’ve turned this comment into a separate post)