Prop 8 proponents to appeal Judge Ware’s ruling, too
Supporters of Proposition 8 filed official notice Monday, June 27, that they intend to appeal a U.S. District Court ruling that rejected their request to vacate the landmark decision that found California’s ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.
U.S. District Court Chief Judge James Ware on June 14 denied a motion by Yes on 8 to vacate the August 2010 ruling by U.S. District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker that Proposition 8 violates the federal constitution. Yes on 8 attorneys have appealed Walker’s ruling to the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, but a ruling on that appeal has been stalled by the appeals panel’s deliberation over whether Yes on 8 has standing to appeal Walker’s ruling.
While the issue of standing is still undecided, Yes on 8 attorneys asked Ware, who replaced retiring Judge Walker, to vacate Walker’s ruling. They claimed Walker’s recently acknowledged 10-year relationship with a man should have been disclosed to them before Walker presided over Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the case challenging Proposition 8.
Judge Ware rejected that motion to vacate, and Yes on 8 says it will now appeal that refusal to vacate. Reasons for their appeal of Ware’s decision have not yet been revealed, but the appeal is not unexpected. Attorneys for Yes on 8 have appealed almost every ruling—big and small—that they have lost.
The only ruling they have not appealed is a ruling June 13 denying their request to have all videotapes of the Perry v. Schwarzenegger trial held under seal by the court. Judge Ware denied the order, noting that the litigation is still on appeal and that no party who has a copy of the tape has violated a protective order prohibiting its use beyond the litigation. But Ware is slated to hear more on that issue August 29, when he hears a cross-motion from attorneys challenging Proposition 8 to release the videotapes to the public.
That August 29 hearing on the videotapes is the next action scheduled for Perry v. Brown (the case’s new name, under Governor Jerry Brown). The California Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments during the first week of September as to whether there is any authority under California law that gives Yes on 8 standing to appeal the federal district court’s ruling in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. After the state court issues its decision in that matter, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals is expected to issue its own ruling on whether Yes on 8 has standing. If the panel rules Yes on 8 does have standing to appeal, the panel is likely to issue, simultaneously, its ruling as to whether to affirm or reverse Judge Walker’s August 2010 decision, finding Proposition 8 unconstitutional.
Any and probably all four of these issues—Walker’s decision, Ware’s refusal to vacate Walker’s decision, Yes on 8’s standing, and the release or sealing of the videotapes—are likely to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
A rather desperate attempt. Rather pathetic. I hope our legal team will be asking for sanctions and legal fees to defend these frivolous abuses of process. One must wonder about lawyers who will take money from clients to bring frivolous motions where less ethically challenged lawyers have washed their hand of the filthy matter.
A desperate attempt? The only thing desperate, Francoise, is the fact that intolerant gay people want to ignore the will of the people. Sad.
Will of the people? Nearly half (47.76%) of Californians voted AGAINST Prop 8. Yes it passed, but by a pretty narrow margin. Regardless, the majority shouldn’t be voting on the rights of a minority. The “will of the people” in the 1960s was to keep interracial marriage illegal, but that didn’t make it right. Thankfully the Supreme Court did the right thing in 1967. I’m glad the courts are starting to do the right thing as far as same-sex marriage is concerned.
@TruthDetector: Truth is since prop 8 national polls show more than half of “the people” support equal marriage. Intolerance is segregating one group of people from another. That’s your truth right there. This weak and not to mention dated mind set of anyone pro Prop 8 is ridiculous. Since you detect the truth, I would like you to tell me how gay marriage would hurt anyone? And right before you decide to quote the bible, the bible also says adultry is a sin. No one is making premarital sex illegal. It also says divorce is not a sin, however, it also says the only time that getting married again is only after your ex spouse has passed on and at that point you may only marry one of their available siblings. There is your truth right there. A heterosexual can marry 8+ times and it be legal, premarital sex can occur and it be legal. Yet two people of the same sex marry and spend the rest of their lives with each other should not be legal? Truth is, it’s hypocracy. No one sin is greater than another. However I do believe a commandment had more intent than calling any act a sin. You can not cast the first stone, to judge is a sin. You really need to not leave comments like the one above, you just left yourself wide open. Now your own ignorance has been pointed out. But again I ask, how is gay marriage worse than premarital sex or serial marriage? How does gay marriage hurt or weaken any family more than premarital sex or serial marriage? If you can answer those questions with truth and FACTS, maybe I will consider your side enough to hear out the rest.
@Francois … I agree, abuse of the legal system should not go unnoticed nor should it go unpunished.
Hey John, that’s what “will of the people” means. Don’t whine just because your side lost. BTW, not all interracial marriage is legal. On interracial marriages between 1 man & 1 woman is legal. Other forms of interracial marriage (multiple-person marriage & same-sex marriage) are not.
@Truth Detector
The will of the people can’t remove “Constitutional Rights,” You need to re-educate yourself on Constitutional Law.
@Thomas Alex,
Um, gay marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution. (Try reading it sometime)
The USA is not ruled by popular vote and neither is who i decide to marry. If you masses think citizenship gives you the right to vote on human rights, you need to study the roots of American government, philosophy, and finish grade school…pathetic masses will never learn and have no place in ruling in a socratic society like the USA
wake up! originally in greek democracy only a few citizens were randomly selected to be part of the senate..the rest of the citizens had rights but didnt get to vote and it’s still the same basically..for ex. it’s the electoral college that decides the US presidency not the masses who cant even think for themselves..
straight marriage isnt mentioned in the constitution (francios, go back
to france where you can get a free education)..DOMA is in
fact unconstitutional as well as Prop8 and DADT as ruled in federal
courts and by DOJ.
thus proving the masses don’t ultimately get to decide by voting who
has rights..they cant be trusted and are not enlightened enough to
rule or even make important decisions..I’m sure Socrates would
agree..sad but true
@Ignorant Sheep,
Gay people face no more discrimination than polygamists when it comes to marriage rights. Try again.
Surely the real reason that the anti-gay groups want these tapes suppressed is that the real evidence presented during this trial made them look like malicious dingbats (about right), and their assertions like wilfully-ignorant garbage (also correct). No surprise that they want to hide what they have done.