Leave a Comment Jacob Combs
Today’s California Supreme Court hearing on standing: pre-hearing thread
September 6, 2011
By Adam Bink
Today at 10 AM PST, the California Supreme Court will convene a hearing to decide whether the proponents of a ballot initiative — in this case, Proposition 8 — have standing to defend the initiative in court when the governor of California and the attorney general decline to do so. As Rick wrote in an op-ed this morning, the ruling, which is required to come within 90 days from today, could have broad implications on the political process.
NPR encapsulates the arguments the court will hear this morning in quotes from Andy Pugno and Ted Olson:
Do the sponsors of a voter initiative have the right under California law to defend it in court?
Andrew Pugno, general counsel for ProtectMarriage.com and a proponent of the same-sex marriage ban, says yes.
“They are the very best suited individuals to stand in for the people who by majority vote exercised their right to pass a Constitutional amendment by initiative and somebody has to be authorized defend it, and who better than the official proponents?” Pugno says.
This question of legal standing arises because former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former Attorney General Jerry Brown — who is now the governor — both declined to defend the voter approved initiative.
“Essentially the governor and attorney general would be exercising a veto over the people’s vote if they are able to essentially allow an initiative to be nullified simply by standing back and doing nothing when its challenged,” Pugno says.
But a group of non-elected individuals can’t represent the State says attorney Theodore Olson, who will argue Tuesday before the California Supreme Court.
“Simply because they were proponents, or they raised money or supported or financed advertising for Proposition 8, they don’t have the right to substitute themselves for the constitutional official In California that does have that right under the California constitution,” Olson says.
Olson will argue that to have legal standing the proponents have to show that they would suffer a direct harm if Prop. 8 is held to be unconstitutional.
“Here, the proponents were asked during the course of the trial, what damage would be done to heterosexual marriage if Proposition 8 was held to be unconstitutional and the lawyer for the Proposition 8 proponents said ‘I don’t know,’” Olson says. “You have to have a direct stake in the matter that’s being litigated.”
Today’s hearing will be broadcast and livestreamed on CalChannel (aka C-SPAN for state government). As they did in last week’s district court hearing on whether to release the tapes from the trial, Courage’s Rick Jacobs and Ana Beatriz Cholo will be providing tidbits and updates from inside the courtroom and the post-hearing press conferences. If you’re not able to follow along here, you can follow our Twitter feeds, @couragecampaign and @equalityontrial. And for those of you not able to watch the live-stream from work or wherever you are, I’ll be live-blogging the hearing so you can follow along. Lots of folks from the P8TT community will also be there. If you hear some legalese you can help define, or you note something interesting from the courtroom or from the hearing itself, send it on in to prop8trial at couragecampaign dot org.
If you’re new to Courage Campaign Institute’s Prop8TrialTracker.com, welcome! This is a blog dedicated to covering the Prop 8 trial and other issues of LGBT equality. We’re powered by a community sharing information and working together to gain equality for all LGBT individuals. Whether new or returning, you may notice a pop-up box asking if you’d like to sign up for updates and action alerts related to the trial (if you’ve seen it before, we’ve reset it once more for this morning since we have a lot of new folks coming in). As a community, we’ve banded together to influence the trial — most particularly related to the public’s right to view it, the subject of today’s hearing — and the more people we have working together, the more we can create change. We’ll keep your information private and only send you alerts we think you’d be most interested in. Thanks for signing up!
Let’s get this started with a few pieces of coverage on today’s hearing:
- As noted yesterday, Maura Dolan from the LA Times offers a preview.
- KTVU looks at the makeup of the court — although, it should be noted, today’s hearing is not about Prop 8 or the constitutionality of the measure, so observations on who’s a liberal and who’s a conservative and who spoke out against Prop 8 may not have much bearing.
- Marriage Equality USA will hold a “No Standing for Prop 8″ sit-in at 8 AM PST on the steps of the court. If anyone gets pictures, please send them in to the e-mail address above.
- American Foundation for Equal Rights provided a helpful FAQ on what standing is and what’s at stake today.
- Emily Bazelon, writing in Slate, hopes our side wins on the merits, not on the question on standing. “Let’s cheer if gay marriage opponents decide not to appeal — but not if they can’t,” she writes. Several of you have also made that argument in the comments. What do you think?
We’ll get the hearing thread started just before the court convenes.
Update: Ana sent in this photo of Courage members Thom Watson and Jeff Tabaco of Daly City outside the courthouse
photo(26)
Having technical problems? E-mail equalityontrial AT couragecampaign DOT org for assistance!
26 Comments Leave a Comment
1.
Michael Barber | September 6, 2011 at 8:37 am
Get back to me when they have a decision. This is the most long, drawn out bunch of shite I have ever witnessed.
2.
VoiceOfConcern | September 6, 2011 at 8:40 am
on my way to the hearing now
@michael b: the courts move slowly.. but look at how long loving v. virginia took
3.
DaveP | September 6, 2011 at 8:45 am
Good morning everyone! I'm watching and following. I couldn't make it to this hearing in person. Thanks Prop8TrialTracker for keeping us informed!
4.
DaveP | September 6, 2011 at 8:49 am
I hear ya. It's strange how this process combines all of the excitement of a roller coaster with the tedious monotony of a slow cross country trek.
5.
LCH | September 6, 2011 at 8:57 am
♀♀=♂♂=♀♂=∑♡
6.
Adam Bink | September 6, 2011 at 9:00 am
You bet!
7.
Ronnie | September 6, 2011 at 9:02 am
Subscribing & sharing……
"Garden State Equality's Anti-Bullying Hotline" (video)….. From the email I received this morning from GSE:
"On this first day of school and of New Jersey's new anti-bullying law, Garden State Equality announces our Anti-Bullying Hotline. If you know of an incident of a student being bullied, whether the student is gay, straight, lesbian, bisexual or transgender, report the incident by calling 1-877-NJBULLY or texting NJBULLY to 66746. We will help. We led the way for the new law. Please spread news of the Hotline far and wide, including by email and social media. Thank you for helping to keep schools safe."
<3…Ronnie:
[youtube Hn3RVJB7-wk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hn3RVJB7-wk youtube]
8.
James A. Tuttle | September 6, 2011 at 9:07 am
I have a test in both Bio Psychology and History of Psychology today but you can bet I'll be following on here in between studying. I know we can't ever glean anything from the questioning of the judges but I keep hoping we can figure out what they might be thinking.
9.
415kathleenk | September 6, 2011 at 9:10 am
I'm going to follow from desk at work at UCSF. I couldn't make it to the hearing today. But i am happy that RIck, Ana and everybody else are there and will keep us informed. I am also taping the cal channel video feed. As a Californian, i hope this question gets settled more in favor of reforming the initiative process which is just ridiculously out of hand- as RIck descibes. i hope the P8 people lose today- cause i always like to see them lose. As to the constitutional questions and the Supreme Court, i am confident that Mr. Boies and Mr. Olson have a strategy. Hello and hugs to Kathleen P and Ann S.
10.
Michael Barber | September 6, 2011 at 9:12 am
Meanwhile, 95% of the LGBT community who live in 99% of all US counties have no federal rights. I hate American law and jurisprudence. How the hell can legislatures pass unconstitutional laws? Shouldn't they be reviewed for constitutionality BEFORE they are enacted? Seems utterly stupid.
11.
David Henderson | September 6, 2011 at 9:21 am
Typo: It's currently 10:20 PST, but the trial doesn't begin until 10:00 PDT, some 40 minutes from now. We're on Daylight Savings Time until November.
12.
socalliberal | September 6, 2011 at 9:36 am
I disagree with Emily Bazelon. If there is no appeal, we win. And I will take a victory wherever we can get it. I have no doubt that we will eventually prevail on the merits. But if we can prevail without having to prevail on the merits in this case, all the better.
13.
scruzjimbo | September 6, 2011 at 9:39 am
Hmmm – while I agree that we're forgetting to identify daylight savings time when writing it out, seems like standard time is actually one hour behind daylight savings time; so it's currently 8:38 a.m. PST.
14.
scruzjimbo | September 6, 2011 at 9:40 am
I guess the important thing is that I'll be here watching at 10:00, which is in about 20 minutes…
15.
Kevin | September 6, 2011 at 9:47 am
Anyone else having problems with video on The California Channel? Is there a better place to watch?
16. Prop 8 Trial Tracker &raq&hellip | September 6, 2011 at 9:50 am
[...] 9:45 AM PST: Beginning in about 15 minutes at 10 AM PST, the California Supreme Court will convene a hearing to decide whether the proponents of a ballot initiative — in this case, Proposition 8 — have standing to defend the initiative in court when the governor of California and the attorney general decline to do so. This thread will house all the coverage of the hearing itself. For more on what is at stake in today’s hearing, check out this thread and explanation here. [...]
17.
rnegron | September 6, 2011 at 9:51 am
We won on the merits. This case is to see if the asshats have standing to appeal. I say let our victory on the merits stand.
18.
socalliberal | September 6, 2011 at 9:53 am
We won before one District Court judge. I say we ought to keep that victory the way it is. It will be valuable persuasive precedent in the future.
19.
socalliberal | September 6, 2011 at 9:54 am
I am too. It's frustrating.
20.
Steven | September 6, 2011 at 9:55 am
it's not livve yet………
21.
Steven | September 6, 2011 at 10:00 am
It's live now
22.
David Henderson | September 6, 2011 at 10:02 am
Oops, that's what I get for trying to convert time zones (I'm in Mountain) and DST simultaneously. (I was going to say "at the same time", but that would have just been even more confusing.)
Regardless, it's now!
23.
MichGuy | September 6, 2011 at 10:05 am
Did we crash the http://www.calchannel.com/ web server because the link no longer works. ??
24.
socalliberal | September 6, 2011 at 10:09 am
Perhaps….very frustrating.
25.
Ann S. | September 6, 2011 at 1:57 pm
Hi 415Kathleen!! Missed you today.
26.
Lupita Baoloy | October 19, 2011 at 10:49 pm
Nice post. I was checking constantly this blog and I’m impressed! Very helpful info specifically the last part
I care for such info much. I was seeking this certain info for a long time. Thank you and best of luck.
Leave a Comment
XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.