Judge Puts Boies and Olson’s Prop. 8 Challenge on Fast Track to Trial
This is a discussion on Judge Puts Boies and Olson’s Prop. 8 Challenge on Fast Track to Trial within the Law News forum, part of the FORUM INFORMATION category; In late May, shortly after the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8, the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, two same-sex ...
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
News
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,438
|
![]() In late May, shortly after the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8, the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, two same-sex couples filed suit in San Francisco federal court, challenging Prop. 8 on grounds that it violated the U.S. Constitution. The lawyers in the case: heavyweights David Boies and Ted Olson. At the time, as we blogged, the mere filing of the complaint stirred up some controversy, even among other Prop. 8 opponents, who fear that setting a case on the path to the U.S. Supreme Court may not be the best strategic move. Well, on Tuesday, the case took a baby step closer to the Supreme Court when the judge assigned to the case, San Francisco federal judge Vaughn Walker, said that while he was inclined not to issue an injunction halting the application of the law, he was eager to set the case on a fast track to trial. Click here for the SF Chronicle article. Trial? Trial, you say? We had the same question — figuring if there was ever a case that could be disposed of by motions, it was this one. But, according to this article in the San Francisco Chronicle, Walker said the case raises numerous issues that may need to be considered at a trial, including the history of discrimination against gays and lesbians and the intent and effects of the state constitutional amendment. Attorney Brian Raum of the Alliance Defense Fund, representing sponsors of Prop. 8, said he sees no need for a trial. “We think this is an issue of law” that does not depend on disputed evidence, Raum said. For example, he said, questions of past persecution of gays and lesbians are irrelevant because Prop. 8 allows them to marry, as long as they wed someone of the opposite sex. Olson and Boies argue that Prop. 8 violates the U.S. Constitution by violating both the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process right as well as the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Guarantee. Olson said he was pleased with Walker’s approach, even though the ballot measure will remain in effect. “He’s taking the case very seriously,” Olson said. “We’re prepared, willing and able to move as fast as the judge is willing to go.” |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmark & Share |
«
Posner: Expand Copyright Law, Save Newspapers
|
Orrick Gives the Boot to Lockstep-Associate Model
»
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Washington judge rejects challenge to R-71 | forum_admin | Law News | 0 | Sep 10th, 2009 07:35 PM |
| Same-sex domestic partnership law: Judge to decide R-71 challenge | forum_admin | Law News | 0 | Sep 1st, 2009 06:31 PM |
| Supreme Challenge? Judge Calls Out Scalia Over Heller Language | WSJ_law_blog | Courts, Decisions, Appeals | 0 | Jul 30th, 2009 02:30 PM |
| Deja new: Prop. 8 challenge reaches Calif. court (AP) | Yahoo!_news | Crimes and Trials News | 0 | Mar 2nd, 2009 06:11 AM |
| Attorney: Tampa trial puts Gotti at a disadvantage (AP) | Yahoo!_news | Crimes and Trials News | 0 | Nov 21st, 2008 12:20 AM |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:10 AM.









Linear Mode


