Perhaps my favorite bit from today's ruling - this swipe at the California initiative process:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
It matters not whether federal courts think it wise or desirable for California to afford proponents this authority to speak for the State, just as it makes no difference whether federal courts think it a good idea that California allows its constitution to be amended by majority vote through a ballot measure in the first place.
|
And yeah, it's a very narrow ruling. But that's what courts often do - rule on the narrowest avenue available - and that's usually the way it works out best. Not so sure in this case.
There's less chance the Supreme Court will want to take the case, but if they do - they are not bound by the narrow findings of the Ninth Circuit, and are perfectly free to consider the wider question found in the judgment of the U.S. District Court that gays ARE entitled to marriage.
(For those keeping score, today's ruling found only that it's unconstitutional to take
any rights away, but not whether marriage rights in particular are constitutionally protected.)