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.