|
Any such marriages would be valid. It was already ruled in the Strauss case (the one involving the 18,000 pre-prop 8 marriages) that marriage rights vest upon a lawful marriage. In other words, if your marriage is legal when it happens, it remains legal no matter what.
Judge Walker's order is merely stayed. It is not invalidated. Even if it is later overturned on appeal, it is the law of the land today. If there were no stay on his injunction of Prop 8 and gay couples married by the trillions, all trillion marriages would be valid in perpetuity because they were legal at the time of marriage.
As for pointers in the right direction, the four factors a court looks to in deciding whether a stay is appropriate are: (1) whether (in this case) the Prop 8 proponents have made a strong showing that they are likely to succeed on the merits; (2) whether proponents will be irreparably injured absent a stay; (3) whether the stay will substantially injure other interested parties; and (4) whether the stay is in the public interest.
Clearly, even to the common observer, the first 3 factors do not weigh in favor of a stay. Perhaps the Ninth Circuit granted it based on the 4th factor, since that seems rather amorphous and can mean practically anything. But the Court of Appeal did not state any reason for granting their stay in their very brief order.
In any event, the first two factors "are the most critical," according to the Supreme Court in Nken v. Holder (2009). So I still think the stay was granted simply as a matter of tradition and prudent practice on a politically charged issue, and not in accordance with the legal factors for granting a stay.
|