Comedienne Rosie O'Donnell's marriage to longtime companion Kelli Carpenter has been nullified, after a ruling by the California Supreme Court. In a 5-2 vote, the court ruled yesterday to void the approximately 4,000 same-sex unions which took place earlier this year in San Francisco, deciding that Mayor Gavin Newsom overstepped his authority in issuing licenses to gay and lesbian couples. Justice Joyce Kennard wrote that they must wait until courts resolve the constitutional issues of state laws which restrict marriages to same-sex couples. In response to the decision, O'Donnell says in a statement, "The struggle for civil rights continues in America, as usual. Vote for (Democrat presidential hopeful) John Kerry."
Posted by Quislet, Esq. on :
This was not entirely unexpected. It was fairly obvious that Mayor Newsom had overstepped his authority. Nice piece of civil disobedience on his part though. Hopefully the current case working its way through the CA courts on the Equal Protection issue will fare better.
Posted by matlock on :
I have to like the guy's nerve.
I really think this is something that's going to happen sooner or later and all this noise about it now is more or less a last ditch effort. If we ever see any kind of discrimination codified into the Constitution of the United States it will be a black day for us all.
Posted by Semi Transparent Fellow on :
I've read the Cal. Supreme Court's opinion (114 pages) and I noted that they took pains to mention several times that their ruling was not meant to indicate how they view the constitutionality of California's marriage law. They specifically stated that that issue was not before them.
Posted by STU on :
quote:Originally posted by Semi Transparent Fellow: I've read the Cal. Supreme Court's opinion (114 pages) and I noted that they took pains to mention several times that their ruling was not meant to indicate how they view the constitutionality of California's marriage law. They specifically stated that that issue was not before them.
quote:Originally posted by Quislet, Esq.: Hopefully the current case working its way through the CA courts on the Equal Protection issue will fare better.
How long will it be before the constitutional issue gets to the CA Supreme Court?
Posted by DrakeB3003 on :
I agree that it was a bold move and the biggest message was the sheer number of people that flooded the courthouse wanting to be married -- it's undeniable that there's a lot of people who feel they've been denied one of the basic privileges of this land.
Posted by Quislet, Esq. on :
quote:Originally posted by STU:
quote:Originally posted by Semi Transparent Fellow: I've read the Cal. Supreme Court's opinion (114 pages) and I noted that they took pains to mention several times that their ruling was not meant to indicate how they view the constitutionality of California's marriage law. They specifically stated that that issue was not before them.
quote:Originally posted by Quislet, Esq.: Hopefully the current case working its way through the CA courts on the Equal Protection issue will fare better.
How long will it be before the constitutional issue gets to the CA Supreme Court?
Don't know. I think that the hearings in the trial court are scheduled for October or September. Then the trial judge will take some time to make her/his decision. Then it can go to the Appeals Court before the Ca Supreme Court. I don't know if the CA SC can take the case before the appeals court hears it.
Goodridge, the Mass case, was originally filed in April of 2001. The Trial court made its decision on May 8, 2002. GLAD filed an appeal on May 21, 2002. On Sept. 8, 2002, the Mass Supreme Judicial Court took the case directly from the Appeals Court. On Mar 4, 2003, the SJC heard the oral arguments. Normally they make a ruling within 6 months. However in this case they didn't rule until Nov. 18, 2003. So that was about 2 & 1/2 years.