UPDATE September 6, 2011
Oral arguments were held at the California Supreme Court as to whether the Proponents of Proposition 8 have standing to defend the initiative in the absence of the Governor or the Attorney General defending the vote of Californians. The Court's written ruling is expected within 90 days. Click here to view the hearing on the California Channel.
UPDATE August 1, 2011
The California Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on September 6th and 7th regarding Prop 8 Proponent's "standing."
UPDATE June 14, 2011
Judge Ware heard arguments on Prop 8 Proponents Motion to Vacate former Judge Walker's ruling on JUne 13, 2011. The following day, Judge Ware issued his 21 page ruling denying the motion.
UPDATE April 25, 2011
Proponents file a motion to have Judge Walker's ruling thrown out based on Walker's failure to recuse himself from the case.
UPDATE February 16, 2011
The California Supreme Court decided that it will decide the Ninth Circuit court's question regarding an initiative sponsor's standing. Click here to view the press release.
UPDATE December 6, 2010
C-SPAN recorded the hearing on the Prop 8 appeal at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. You can view the recorded C-SPAN: Perry v. Schwarzenegger Oral Arguments here. Click here to view the press conference following the hearing.
UPDATE September 17. 2010
The hearing on the appeal of Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling overturning Proposition 8 will be heard December 6, 2010. Click here to view our appellate brief filed 9/17/2010.
UPDATE June 16, 2010
After a 5 month hiatus, the Court in the case to overturn Proposition 8 has commenced closing arguments. Judge Walker submitted several questions to the attorneys on both side to answer at the hearing. You can view our responses here.
BACKGROUND -
Homosexual marriage advocates are challenging in federal court the constitutionality of Prop. 8, which passed in November 2008 when more than 7 million Californians voted in favor of the constitutional amendment which defines marriage as between only a man and a woman.
After its passage, many lawsuits were filed challenging the validity of the measure and in May, 2009, the California Supreme Court held that Prop 8 was indeed lawfully enacted. Three days prior to that ruling, however, a group with independent access to funding filed suit in US District Court, Northern Division on behalf of two same-sex couples in what is the Perry v Schwarzenegger case.
This case holds national significance for the future of marriage. The stakes in the Perry case are enormous: a ruling to overturn Prop 8 could nullify the marriage laws in 45 states and imperil the federal Defense of Marriage Act. The proponents of Prop 8, through ProtectMarriage.com, have intervened in this case and are the only ones actively defending the right of California voters to define marriage as being between a man and a woman.
What's at stake in the Perry case is not just the right of California voters to reaffirm the definition of marriage as only between a man and a woman, but whether marriage will be redefined in every state in the nation. It is the first marriage case in the history of the nation where a judge has allowed the thoughts, motivations, and personal beliefs of an initiative's sponsors to be put on trial to search for "improper" intent.
Advocates of traditional marriage will work hard to show that voters can rationally conclude that marriage is a unique institution that promotes important interests respecting natural childrearing, and that those interests are broader than the personal, private special interests of the adults involved.