Skip to main content

On Prop. 8 in California

Our law starts with the U. S. Constitution. Then state constitutions. Then regular old laws (traffic laws, statutes, etc.). By constitutional definition, a law cannot be passed (by legislature or electoral consent) that stands in conflict with a state Constitution (and by extension, the Federal Constitution). Even McCain stands against a Federal Constitutional amendment prohibiting gay marriage

Prop 22 was found to be in violation of the Equal Protections clause of the California Constitution. That decision is PRECISELY in the definition of the role of the judiciary. That's kinda the point of CO-EQUAL BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

Prop 8 is an attempt at adjusting the state Constitution to make an end run around the "unconstitutionality" of the language of Prop 22. But, here's the deal... The will of the people DOES NOT TRUMP THE RIGHTS OF THE FEW. That's at the core of our Constitution.

People keep talking about the judges overthrowing the will of the people. Rather, the California Supreme Court refocused the attention of the people to our Constitution and its equal protection defenses.

Before 1977, the civil code in California defined marriage as "...a personal relation arising out of a civil context, to which consent of the parties making that contract is necessary."

When this was found to be too vague for some folks they changed it that year to add the words between a man and a woman. However, another section of the civil code allowed California to recognize marriages from other states. Even THAT was too much, so Prop 22 was born... which led us to Prop 8.

The Judiciary is important...

That's why the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision has no force today...

That's why Plessy v. Ferguson was struck down upon JUDICIAL REVIEW...

That's why Brown v. Topeka blasted apart "Separate, but Equal", Jim Crow and segregation...

That's why Loving v. Virginia prevailed and allows couples of different races to marry...

DISCRIMINATION IS WRONG. Prop 8 isn't about kids... it isn't about religion. It's about discrimination.

And it's wrong.

VOTE NO ON PROP. 8

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Open Letter to GOP recruiters

To whom it may concern: I am a telegenic, articulate, working, married father of two who owns his own house and a small business. Before you come knocking on my door, there are a few ground rules. Rule No. 1 No discussion of "The Party of Lincoln" without claiming Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms too. I know American history well enough, thank you. I also know that Thurmond was only a Democrat until the party decided to stand up for the rights of Black people. Then he jumped ship (while denying his own half-Black daughter) and led the drive to keeping a strong segregated state. Leave Lincoln in his grave (besides, we both know he didn't really emancipate very many don't we?) Rule No. 2 Liberal is not a bad word. It does not mean that Democrats love big government and spending tax dollars foolishly. That's Bush's job. Nor does it mean that I have been stroked and manipulated by a Leftist cabal that wants to think for me. Convince me on the merits of what YOU ...

The Two Parties are NOT the same.

Thinking about the differences between the Dems and the Trump. Trump is promising "America First" jingoism without delivering anything but racism, while riding the economic tide of his predecessor. Consider what the Dems have been DEMANDED to fix. 1) Healthcare for all Americans 2) Student loan relief 3) A workable immigration solution 4) $15 min. wage and/or guaranteed income 5) Incremental gun regulation 6) Protecting the environment 7) Iran nuclear treaty 8) Thwarting Russian election interference 9) Reparations 10) Lowering taxes for middle class 11) Raising taxes for the 1% 12) Improving K-12 education 13) Rolling back Citizens United 14) Protecting Roe v. Wade 15) A satisfying DC Cinematic Universe (why not?) It's perfectly fine to be in your feelings if you are upset that this country is so f*cked that your particular issue is not being trumpeted by all (or any) of the Democratic primary candidates. It's even OK if you feel that the cur...

An open letter to Bob Johnson

BJ... phi... bruh... Your tirade about Barack Obama is appalling. You earned your billion on the backs of ass-slapping videos, blaxploitation reruns and informercials and you have THE GALL to talk about being "insulted" that "we are so stupid?" Back at you, dawg. Incidentally, NOT ONE PERSON was confused about your thinly veiled reference about Obama's days "in the neighborhood." It was pathetic when the recently dismissed Clintonian flak floated it out there. Coming from you, it's traitorously venomous. We were smart enough to avoid buying tickets to "Who's Your Caddy?" and we're smart enough to understand your half-assed attempt at a smear. By the way, if you're going to "go there," have the balls to own up to it. Your backtrack about referring to his days as an organizer is even worse than the smear. Are we to understand that Obama's grass roots community leadership is somehow less legitimate than the...