Federal court on Prop 8: No resumption of same-sex marriage in CA

Earlier today the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied plaintiffs' request to lift a stay on same-sex marriage in California pending an appeal of Prop 8.

California's Proposition 8 took away the right to marry from same-sex couples in the state a mere six months after the State Supreme Court recognized that discrimination against same-sex couples was unconstitutional.

Last year, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker declared Prop 8 unconstitutional, "gravely harmful" and ordered California to cease its enforcement.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals suspended his ruling which demanded the immediate resumption of same-sex marriages in the state.

In a hearing late last year, the Ninth Circuit returned the case to the CA State Supreme Court to decide on the issue of the defendant's standing.

Last month the plaintiffs in the case, together with the City of San Francisco, asked the Appeals court to lift that suspension and allow same-sex couples to wed, as the CA State Supreme Court is scheduled to take up the case in September.

The thee-judge panel of Stephen Reinhardt, Michael Hawkins and N. Randy Smith issued a one-sentence order today that said they had reviewed the arguments and the applicable legal standards, and "we deny plaintiffs' motion at this time."

Expressing disappointment was the American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER), which represents the plaintiffs, as well as other gay rights organizations.

"Several weeks ago, we filed a motion with the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit asking the Court to lift its stay and allow California's gay and lesbian couples to marry," Chad Griffin, AFER's chair, said in a statement.

"It is decidedly unjust and unreasonable to expect California's gay and lesbian couples to put their lives on hold and suffer daily discrimination as second-class citizens while their U.S. District Court victory comes to its final conclusion," he said.

Equality California Executive Director Geoff Kors echoed those sentiments, saying in a press release, "Today's ruling is a major setback for same-sex couples and their families who must continue living every day in legal limbo without the basic freedoms and protections guaranteed to them by our nation's Constitution. Every day same-sex couples are denied the freedom to marry, their families suffer significant harm."

West Hollywood city council member John Duran told WeHo News that his initial reaction to the ruling was one of disappointment, but as he considered the notion, "they may have saved us from a too-early appeal directly to the Supreme Court," by not opening up the marital floodgates.

He felt that to allow marriages to commence before the two courts wring clarity from the Prop 8 initiative would create a good reason to appeal to the Supremes, and he worries about Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's recent pronouncement that 1973's Roe V Wade, perhaps, was decided too early.

She said that the decision led to civil and social unrest that might have been avoided with a slower approach.

"If she brings that thinking to the idea of gay marriage," said Mr. Duran, "we could suffer a setback.

"I think the appeals court did us a favor by keeping it out of the high court's hands."