|
It doesn't go back to the trial level. The district court had legitimate authority to allow the Prop 8 proponents to intervene as plaintiffs. What's at issue is whether the Ninth Circuit and the California Supreme Court got it right when granting those same Prop 8 proponents standing to press an appeal when the state refused to do so, and also whether they meet the other standards for Article III standing TO APPEAL that neither the 9th or the California Supremes even addressed.
Interestingly, there's a similar stated question on the SCOTUS order accepting the Windsor DOMA case. Does the House of Representatives have standing to defend DOMA when the justice department refuses to? In this instance, I believe the law is clear it does. But it seems the conference strategy was to give SCOTUS an opt-out option on both hot-button cases. I don't expect them to take either easy out. Again, because then Why Bother to Take the Cases?
|