‘Frivolous and regrettable’ lawsuits filed against victorious Proposition 8
‘Frivolous and regrettable’ lawsuits filed against victorious Proposition 8

.- Opponents of California’s Proposition 8, which on Tuesday successfully restored the definition of marriage to be between one man and one woman, have filed suit asking the California Supreme Court to overturn the measure. Counsel for the Yes on 8 campaign responded, calling the lawsuits “frivolous and regrettable.”

The lawsuits were filed by lawyers for same-sex couples that received state marriage licenses during the recent period in which the Supreme Court mandated that homosexual marriages be recognized.

The plaintiffs argue that Proposition 8 rises to the level of a constitutional revision because it fundamentally altered the guarantee of equal protection. Further, they claim that Prop. 8 is illegal because a constitutional revision must be approved by the legislature before being proposed to voters.

Joseph Grodin, a former California Supreme Court justice and an opponent of Proposition 8 who assisted in earlier legal challenges to the measure, said he believes the argument has legal merit.

The state’s high court has struck down ballot measures as illegal constitutional revisions twice before, but Grodin said the proposals involved “a broader scope of changes.”

The lawsuit, which was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Equality California was soon joined by another from the lesbian couple that was the first to be married after the Supreme Court overruled California voters previous ban on gay marriage. The San Francisco City Attorney’s office has also told the San Diego Union Tribune that “he plans to challenge the validity of a ballot measure that would change the state constitution to ban gay marriage.”

Frank Schubert, co-chairman of the pro-Proposition 8 campaign, criticized the legal actions.

“If they want to legalize gay marriage, what they should do is bring an initiative themselves and ask the people to approve it," Schubert said to the Los Angeles Times. “But they don't. They go behind the people's back to the courts and try and force an agenda on the rest of society."

The General Counsel of ProtectMarriage.com – Yes on 8, Andrew Pugno, called the lawsuit by the ACLU “frivolous and regrettable,” characterizing it as an attempt to “invalidate the decision of California voters to enshrine traditional marriage in California's constitution.”

“These same groups filed an identical case with the California Supreme Court months ago, which was summarily dismissed,” Pugno said in a Wednesday statement. “We will vigorously defend the People's decision to enact Proposition 8.”

According to Pugno, the ACLU made the same “constitutional revision” claim in a “nearly identical matter” in Oregon concerning that state’s marriage amendment. Their claim, decided in the Oregon case Martinez v. Kulongoski, was unanimously rejected.

"This is the second time that California voters have acted to define marriage as between a man and a woman,” Pugno continued. “It is time that the opponents of traditional marriage respect the voters' decision.”

He also attacked the lawsuit as “completely lacking in merit.”

“It is as if their campaign just spent $40 million on a losing campaign opposing something they now say is a legal nullity. Their position is absurd, an insult to California voters and an attack on the initiative process itself.”

Pugno argued that the right to amend California’s constitution is not “granted to the People,” but rather “reserved by the People.” He cited as precedent a California Supreme Court ruling which held that the death penalty was a “violation of fundamental state constitutional rights,” a decision overturned through the state’s initiative amendment process.

“Even a liberal jurist who vehemently disagreed with the People's decision on the death penalty, Justice Stanley Mosk, nevertheless acknowledged the People's authority to decide the issue through the initiative-amendment process,” he noted.

"The coalition that has worked so hard for the past year to enact Proposition 8 will vigorously defend the People's decision against this unfortunate challenge by groups who, having lost in the court of public opinion, now turn to courts of law to pursue their agenda," Pugno concluded.

Ads by AdsLiveMedia(What's this?)

* The number of messages that can be online is limited. CNA reserves the right to edit messages for content and tone. Comments and opinions expressed by users do not necessarily reflect the opinions or beliefs of CNA. CNA will not publish comments with abusive language, insults or links to other pages


Ads by Google (What's this?)

Featured Videos

Presentation of the book "The Pastor"
Presentation of the book "The Pastor"
Synod on the Family October 2014
Preferential option for the poor
God is alive, even in sport
'A forbidden God' named Best Film at the International Catholic Film Festival
Vatican backs a 'Pause for Peace' during World Cup final
The effects of religious violence in Sarajevo 
The origin of Corpus Christi 
Corpus Christi at the Vatican 
Homage to an Indian Cardinal
Train of the Child's Light
New book explaining gestures of the Mass
Encounter between Pope Francis and the Charismatic Renewal in the Spirit Movement.
Religious tensions subside amid Balkan floods
John Paul II Center for Studies on Marriage and Family
Saint John Paul II on cartoon
Syrian Christian refugees
Papal Foundation Pilgrimage
Exorcism or prayer of liberation?
First meeting of Commission for Protection of Minors

Liturgical Calendar

July 22, 2014

Saint Mary Magdalene

All readings:
Today »
This year »

Catholic Daily

Gospel of the Day

Mt 13:24-43


Daily Readings

First Reading:: Mic 7: 14-15, 18-20

Saint of the Day

St. Mary Magdalene »


Homily of the Day

Mt 12:38-42


Ads by AdsLiveMedia.com

Ads by AdsLiveMedia.com
Text only

Follow us: