When stream of consciousness meets a waterfall.
Powered by Twitter Tools
Powered by Twitter Tools
Powered by Twitter Tools
Powered by Twitter Tools
It’s not much of a secret that I opposed Proposition 8, and of course, I applauded the judge’s decision today to overturn it. But, I have to hand it to proponents of the measure. Their strategy may have been less about the law and more about a well thought-out public relations strategy. They had to do it this way because they knew that they were going to lose all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where, at least right now, conservatives still have a fighting chance.
The most obvious sign they knew they would lose was filing for the stay to prevent gay marriages, pending appeal to a higher court, even before the judge handed down his decision. Second, the proponents did not mount much of a case. In the decision, the Judge writes “The minimal evidentiary presentation made by proponents does not meet the heavy burden of production necessary to show that Proposition 8 is narrowly tailored to a compelling government interest.” (Page 117) Finally, and less obviously, according to a report on NPR today, the judge is openly gay, and yet those defending Proposition 8 did not oppose his hearing the case. The NPR reporter went on to explain that the judge is known for his thoughtful opinions.
But his reputation doesn’t matter. Prop 8 supporters have already trotted out that most tired of all chestnuts, the “Activist Court.” Instead of trying to argue, from a legal perspective, why the judge was wrong and they were right, proponents of Prop. 8 have and will state that Judge Walker’s decision was the result of an “activist court,” overturning the will of the people. Take, for example, Senator Orrin Hatch’s (R-Utah) statement:
“Today, one federal judge trumped seven million voters by making up a right that is not in the Constitution,” Hatch said. “This is what happens when judges make up the Constitution as they go along, when judges rather than the Constitution are the supreme law of the land.” (sacbee.com)
The fact that Judge Walker is openly gay is just going to add salt to the soup.
The anti-gay media juggernaut now springs to life and will work at a fever pitch, riling up its supporters and creating an atmosphere less about thoughtful deliberation and more about knee-jerk reaction (pretty much in line with all political speech these days). Of course, such public outcry ought not influence the Supreme Court, but it will leave politicians scrambling to find ways to protect themselves. Remember all the hemming and hawing that gave us “domestic partnerships” for same-sex couples and marriage for opposite-sex couples? (Which smacks of “separate but equal,” but I digress.)
As for overturning the will of the people, Judge Walker quotes another decision and concludes: “[M]oral disapproval, without any other asserted state interest,” has never been a rational basis for legislation. Lawrence, 539 US at 582 (O’Connor, J, concurring). (Page 133)
RSS Feed