analysis

...now browsing by tag

Matt Baume: Prop 8 Rehearing Analysis

Wednesday, February 22nd, 2012

Big news in the Prop 8 case — the Proponents have officially challenged our Ninth Circuit victory. So let’s talk about what that means for the Prop 8 case, what comes next, and when we can finally start getting married again.

Full Story from AFER

Click here for gay wedding resources.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook. We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: analysis, matt baume, ninth circuit, prop 8

Analysis: What’s Next for the Prop 8 Case?

Thursday, February 9th, 2012

A reader of my blog posting on Tuesday’s 9th Circuit decision in Perry v. Brown, the California Proposition 8 case, asked me to clarify what I meant when I said there is no appeal “as of right” from this decision, so I’ve decided to post my ruminations about whether this case is going further.

This case is over unless either a majority of the judges on the full 9th Circuit Court of Appeals votes to grant a petition for rehearing “en banc” (which in the 9th Circuit’s practice would involve the chief judge and ten other judges drawn at random from the list of active [not retired "senior status"] judges of the Circuit) and/or unless at least four Justices of the United States Supreme Court vote to grant a petition for writ of certiorari. The first question now confronted by the losing party in Tuesday’s decision, the Proponents of Proposition 8, is whether to file a petition for rehearing en banc, or whether to file a petition for writ of certiorari. They do not have to seek rehearing before seeking Supreme Court appeal, but petitioning the Supreme Court would cut off their opportunity to seek en banc review.

If they want to prolong the agony of delaying implementation of District Judge Walker’s injunction against the enforcement of the constitutional amendment created by Prop 8, they would first file for en banc rehearing, which would delay a final decision at the court of appeals level for a substantial period of time if the petition for rehearing is granted, since the grant of such a petition would vacate the panel decision and, most likely, keep the stay in effect while new briefs are filed and a new hearing is scheduled by the 11-judge panel, which then would take some time to render its decision.

Full Story from the NY Law School

Click here for gay wedding resources in California.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: analysis, case, prop 8, supreme court

Prop 8 Ruling: The Advocate Analysis

Wednesday, February 8th, 2012

Expert analyses of the Ninth Circuit’s Prop. 8 ruling Tuesday have been legion throughout the day, though one from Williams Institute legal director Jennifer Pizer stood out as particularly thoughtful. The former Lambda Legal marriage project director wrote earlier today:

The decision breaks new ground because it’s the first federal appeals court to strike down a state’s exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage. But it doesn’t break new ground legally.

Instead, the ruling’s close application of Justice Kennedy’s 1996 equal protection analysis (in the Romer v. Evans, Colorado Amendment 2 case) both makes it less likely that the Supreme Court will grant review, and more likely that that plaintiffs would win if the case does go up. Justice Kennedy is generally seen as the key vote, and today’s decision – looking at another state ballot measure – uses his 1996 analysis as a roadmap.

Full Story from The Advocate

Click here for gay wedding resources in California.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: advocate, analysis, prop 8, ruling

Prop 8 Ruling Analysis From Ari Ezra Waldman

Wednesday, February 8th, 2012

More than any single vote, more than any single veto, more than any single legislative majority, the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Perry v. Brown is the most significant advancement in the fight for marriage equality in American history to date. Consider this: Never before has a federal appellate court affirmed any of the conclusions that the Ninth Circuit did today:

that denying committed gay couples their right to marry cannot encourage opposite sex marriages
that when a state denies the right to marry while allowing gay couples all the rights and privilges of marriage, it cannot base the marriage ban on any rationale that denigrates gay parents
that domestic partnerships are unequal to marriage
that, as a matter of law, marriage rights do not hinge on natural procreative ability
and, of course, that a ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.

Today’s opinion was both broad and narrow, with wide implications and constrained effects. In 76 pages, Judge Reinhardt and Judge Hawkins affirmed the district court’s opinion that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional, but its decision hinged on the fact that Prop 8 effectuated a taking away of rights previously existing in California per In re Marriage Cases.

Full Story from Towleroad.com

Click here for gay wedding resources in California.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Response »
Tags: analysis, prop 8, ruling

Analysis of the Prop 8 “Standing” Decision

Saturday, November 19th, 2011

The California Supreme Court issued the latest entry in the legal paper trail of the saga of Proposition 8 today. Prop 8, recall, is California’s initiative constitutional amendment that stripped same-sex couples of their previously fundamental right to marry under the California Constitution.

Answering a question that had been certified by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the court ruled “that when the public officials who ordinarily defend a challenged state law or appeal a judgment invalidating the law decline to do so, under … the California Constitution and the relevant provisions of the Elections Code, the official proponents of a voter-approved initiative measure are authorized to assert the state’s interest in the initiative’s validity, enabling the proponents to defend the constitutionality of the initiative and to appeal a judgment invalidating the initiative.”

With this ruling, the dispute over Prop 8′s constitutionality returns to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, where that federal court now seems more likely to rule that Prop 8′s official sponsors (“the Proponents”) have the legal authority or standing to appeal Judge Walker’s August 2010 decision holding Prop 8 unconstitutional.

Full Story from Cruz Lines

Click here for gay wedding resources in California.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: analysis, california supreme court, decision, prop 8, standing

NY: Analysis of the Religious Exemptions in the Marriage Equality Bill

Friday, June 24th, 2011

For those so inclined/interested/bemused/not yet tired of hearing about it…

The New York State Assembly has just introduced a series of amendments to the same-sex marriage bill. They are available here. The amendments were drafted during three-way consultations with Governor Cuomo (and his team), a select group of NY State Senate Republicans and Senate Democrats. Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, who seems like he has been Assembly speaker since the Taft Administration, is cool with the amendments. It will pass the Assembly, and one would imagine the amendments would not be introduced in the Assembly were they not guaranteed to pass in the Senate. Let’s hope.

One point of politics and one point of analysis.

First, to sausage-making. State Senator Ball, a Republican from somewhere other than New York City, came out against the bill before the amendments were finalized. His statement is irking some in the gay blogosphere:

“Knowing that marriage equality was likely to pass, I thought it important to force the issue of religious protections. Over the past few weeks, I’ve had the distinct opportunity of listening to literally thousands of residents, on both sides of this issue, by holding an undecided stance. I thought it was important to listen to all of my constituents and hold an undecided position until the actual bill language was written and everyone’s voice had been heard. Now that the final text is public, I am proud that I have secured some strong protections for religious institutions and basic protections for religious organizations. The bill still lacks many of the basic religious protections I thought were vital, and for this reason, and as I did in the Assembly, I will be voting ‘no.’”

Full Story from Towleroad.com

Click here for gay marriage resources in New York.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook – just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you’ll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: analysis, marriage equality, new york, religious exemptions

Analysis of the Department of Justice Defense of DOMA

Friday, January 14th, 2011

Ari Ezra Waldman is a 2002 graduate of Harvard College and a 2005 graduate of Harvard Law School. After practicing in New York for five years and clerking at a federal appellate court in Washington, D.C., Ari is now on the faculty at California Western School of Law in San Diego, California. His areas of expertise are criminal law, criminal procedure, LGBT law and law and economics. Ari will be writing weekly posts on law and various LGBT issues.

Fresh off judicial and legislative victories that are closing the final chapter of insidious discrimination against gays and lesbians in the American military, our community just received a stark reminder that our quest for equality is ongoing. Yesterday, the Department of Justice filed its appeal in Gill v. OPM and Massachusetts v. HHS, two cases out of Boston that declared Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional. The arguments in this brief were expected and they rehash many of the points we have discussed here. I would like to provide a short summary and some analysis.

The brief (available here) argues that DOMA Section 3 — which restricts federal recognition of marriages those between a man and a woman and, as a result, denies access to countless federal benefits to same-sex couples married in marriage equality states — does not violate the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause because Congress had a rational reason for passing the law.

Full Story from Towleroad.com

Click here for gay marriage resources.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: analysis, defense of marriage act, doma

Prop 8 Ruling: NCLR Analysis

Wednesday, August 4th, 2010

National Center For Lesbian Rights (NCLR) Legal Director and Staff Attorney: Today’s decision in Perry v. Schwarzenegger is nothing short of a grand slam legal victory for LGBT people. In a comprehensive and crystal clear opinion, Judge Walker held that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.

Judge Walker reached this conclusion for two reasons: because Proposition 8 denies individuals the fundamental right to marry without a compelling reason to do so, violating the Due Process clause of the federal constitution, and because it violates the Equal Protection clause by discriminating based on sex and sexual orientation.

Under both the Due Process clause and the Equal Protection clause, whether a law is constitutional comes down to whether the state has a good enough reason for it. So, the core of Judge Walker’s opinion today is his factual findings – the determinations he made based on the evidence presented to him at trial. Judge Walker’s methodical opinion relies on the impressive and authoritative trial testimony of the Perry plaintiffs and their expert witnesses to conclusively refute every argument ever advanced against permitting same-sex couples to marry.

Full Story from CA Progress Report

Click here for gay marriage resources.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: analysis, Gay Marriage, marriage equality, prop 8, proposition 8, ruling, same sex marriage

Prop 8 Ruling: Analysis of the Decision

Wednesday, August 4th, 2010

Here’s what you need to know about Judge Vaughn Walker’s decision invalidating California’s Proposition 8, a referendum passed by voters that banned same-sex marriage. The decision itself will be appealed, and Walker’s reasoning could serve as the basis for argument at the appellate level – or, the appeals court could decide to argue the case a completely different way.

What matters are the facts that Walker finds. Why? As Chris Geidner notes, “[the] judge or jury who makes the findings of fact, however, is given deference because factual determinations are aided by the direct benefit of the judge or jury at trial. On appeal, Judge Walker’s findings of fact will only be disturbed if the appellate court finds any to be clearly erroneous.”

Walker, in his decision, writes that “Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gays and lesbians for denial of a marriage license.” He evaluates as credible witnesses the panel of experts who testified against Proposition 8, and finds fault with the credentials of several witnesses who testified against same-sex marriage, including David Blankenhorn, President of the Institute for American Values:

Full Story from The Atlantic

Click here for gay marriage resources.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: analysis, decision, Gay Marriage, Judge Vaughn Walker, marriage equality, prop 8, proposition 8, ruling

CA: Analysis of Prop 8 Campaign Shows Late Shift in White Parents to Yes Side

Tuesday, August 3rd, 2010

Immediately after Proposition 8 passed, many who supported same-sex marriage tried to make sense of the results. A set of assumptions gained wide acceptance. Some are correct. Most, however, are just plain wrong. And it’s crucial that we know what happened in the last election before launching another attempt to legalize marriage for all.

I recently headed a team that analyzed data from polls conducted by the No on 8 campaign during the run-up to the election. Our analysis sheds new light on what fueled the Proposition 8 victory.

One big question after the election: Who moved? Six weeks before the vote, Proposition 8 was too close to call. But in the final weeks, supporters pulled ahead, and by election day, the outcome was all but certain.

Full Story from the LA Times

Click here for gay marriage resources in California.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: analysis, children, Gay Marriage, lies, marriage equality, misinformation, parents, prop 8, proposition 8, same sex marriage