Today the California Supreme Court, by a 4-3 vote, denied the Petition for Stay and for Rehearing in the California marriage cases. This past May 15 the Supreme Court ruled in those cases to allow same-sex “marriages” in the state to go forward, despite the fact that the contentious issue is slated to come before California voters in the form of a vote on a constitutional amendment during this November’s election. Several conservative organizations, however, petitioned to have last month’s decision put on hold until the November referendum.Today’s decision to deny the petition was split along the same lines as the original May 15 ruling, with Chief Justice George and Justices Kennard, Werdegar and Moreno in the majority. Justices Baxter, Chin and Corrigan dissented. Today’s ruling states that the May 15 same-sex “marriage” decision will become final on June 16, 2008, at 5:00 pm (PT), opening the door to the possibility of thousands of homosexual couples obtaining marriage licenses before California voters have the chance to address the issue.
Liberty Counsel filed a petition on behalf of the Campaign for California Families requesting the California Supreme Court to stay its opinion pending the November referendum. On Monday, the California Secretary of State, Debra Bowen, certified the California Marriage Protection Act (“Amendment”) for the November 2008 ballot. The Amendment to the California Constitution states: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” Thus, should the amendment pass, neither the courts nor any governmental agency will be permitted to validate or recognize any same-sex marriage license.
The cases now will return to the California Court of Appeal for the Supreme Court’s order to be implemented. Liberty Counsel is considering filing a petition with the Court of Appeal, requesting a stay pending the outcome of the November vote on the Amendment. The Court of Appeal panel previously upheld the state’s marriage laws.
Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, who argued the case at every stage of the litigation, commented: “Denying a stay in light of the certification of the Marriage Protection Act for the November ballot reveals the political agenda of a handful of judges. Judges acting as judges and not as legislators would have granted the stay. The battle over marriage is far from over and will not be decided by four judges. The people will decide in November. If any same-sex marriage licenses are issued before November, the passage of the constitutional amendment will make them invalid and invisible.”
Loading ...
Comments