Now that the Supreme Court of California is inundated with requests to take up the several worthwhile challenges to Prop 8, the forces behind inequality have issued the ultimate threat to the sitting Justices: recall.
Civil rights groups, churches and local governments have filed six lawsuits asking the court to declare the measure an illegal constitutional revision. Letters also have poured into the court pleading for urgent action, and anti-Proposition 8 rallies have attracted large crowds statewide.
At the same time, opponents of gay marriage have warned that they will work to oust any justice who votes against Proposition 8, a threat particularly palpable in a year when voters in other states have booted six state high court justices after campaigns by special interest groups.
The California Supreme Court has previously taken up the question of whether initiated propositions are not amendments but "revisions" to the constitution — and six times ruled against those attempting to stop the amendment from taking effect. In only two cases did the "revision" argument being made by Prop 8 opponents succeed. But should the sitting Justices be inclined to view the revocation of a fundamental right (marriage) from a suspect class (same-sex couples) as a "revision" to our constitution and therefore only possible by a 2/3rds vote of the legislature prior to a popular vote, the forces behind Prop 8 have issued the ultimate threat: recall.
The official Proposition 8 campaign has discouraged supporters from threatening a recall while the court is considering lawsuits to overturn the measure.
"We think the discussion of a recall at this point is premature and not helpful to the current situation," said Andrew Pugno, a lawyer for the campaign. "The court should have a chance to do the right thing."
But if the court voted to overturn Proposition 8, "no one would be able to stop" a recall, he said.
So they are discouraging their crazy supporters from talking about it, but "no one would be able to stop" it. Sounds like a recall threat to me.
42 Comments
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Advanced search
Recalled for doing their job? I’m gonna walk away before I type something really nasty.
Boy these guys are a piece of work. I can just imagine the voters hearing the cost of a recall election in these economic times and thinking they want to run out and do that. Never mind all the other issues this brings up.
Gah! If they want to do a recall, they should have to pay the whole multi-million-dollar cost of doing it themselves!
(From yesterday, but I thought it deserved some FP time.)
It’s kinda funny watching all this from over here in quaker, never take QuakerGirl name in vain, puritanical PA.
Isn’t this something like racketeering? Seems to me that this would be COMPLETELY illegal.
Jeebus on a stick. The fundies need to be told that God or god doesn’t need their bigoted, myopic, stupid, neanderthal, asshole help.
Are the CA supremes subject to Recall? They are not elected.
Which God?! lol
Oh that’s right, God then the Mohammad and Jesus.
But did the latter two really care? If not or so did the God?
Here’s what the ProtectMarriage folks had to say in an email to supporters today (my bold):
I think they will come to regret the formulation “For now.” We must ALWAYS allow the Court to make its decisions. Saying that they will do so FOR NOW puts their supporters on notice that things might change depending upon the court’s eventual decision. Don’t you think?
They are subject to recall, and must be re-certified by popular vote every 12 years. The Chief Justice, Ron George, who authored the marriage equality decision, is up for re-certification in 2010. So a recall in 2009 would be particularly idiotic.
only an activist judge if it does pass thee wishes.
s/does/doesn’t
Your answer
Thanks Teddy. Is it a majority vote for recall? Or what percentage of voters?
Is it just my imagination or are the political and judicial systems in California a complete and total clusterf*ck?
If a church got involved in a recall for something of this nature would it be considered a violation of the tax exempt status?
I think it should be against the law to make that kind of conditioned threat against a court. It is transparently a coercive attempt to scare the judiciary into failing to administer justice fairly according to the law.
I suppose, however, that it could be considered protected political speech. Don’t know about that.
Our constitution, including the voter initiative process, were written in the Progressive Era. So I guess the moral of the story is: more tears shed over answered prayers than unanswered ones!
Darrell Issa please report to the red courtesy phone, Darrel Issa.
The prohibition against tax-exempt organizations is about candidates, not issues; seems like involvement in a recall of a named jurist would fall on the candidate side of the prohibition. They certainly couldn’t be involved in the re-certification election in 2010. I wouldn’t think.
No, according to Peterr, they only get in trouble if they promote a political candidate, they are allowed to take sides on political “issues.”
how could it not be?
Looks like I owe you a coke.
I hope the No on Prop 8 movement stands prepared to defend the members of the judiciary for doing their job.
Unbelievable, especially since the majority of the money to fund this campaign didn’t even come from here.
On another topic, I am so tired of this Clinton drama MSNBC is creating around the Secretary of State nomination. Alison Stuart is really not the A-team; I hope Rachel Maddow takes an opportunity to review the tapes. My recollection is that Keith booted Alison as a sub after a couple of rather unpleasant gaffes, one of them revolving around Wendy Vitter and I think another around Hillary Clinton.
This “drama” is just stupid. And it makes me turn off my teevee. Off to write Rachel an email at rachel@msnbc.com.
The fundies are hanging themselves on this one. They try this, they will lose, and not on just this issue. Messing with the courts is a big deal.
I hope it somehow backfires on them. They are all for the rule of law except when it doesn’t go their way.
Chief Justice Ron George is very well-connected in San Francisco’s wealthy community, and defended himself quite well against a rather well-organized campaign during his last re-certification in 1998. The other justice up in 2010 voted with the minority (against marriage equality) in May. He had a closer call in 1998 and has hewed a little closer to the conservative way since.
I’m pretty tired of the whole cabinet drama. Somebody please wake me on January 20.
An Infamous move by the republicans decades ago was to close psychiatric care facilities and severely cut mental health services nation wide.
Read the comments from this article and you will quickly understand the mind set of the opposition to equality. This is not the 21st century to these people.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/…..75558.html
One option left respond in kind. All Mormons are fair game Mitt is never getting gay votes. Can we get the Log Cabin Republicans to learn to say No! just this once to anti Gay Politicians?
Punish the Mormons scare the Catholics remind them that the Church once approved of slavery.
The Church should not be on the WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY AGAIN!
If the court does not overturn prop 8 expect a recall.
Not rowdy enough! Gets dark early, here want ruckus now!
Hey!
I did the same.
or if it is going to be, let it stay our of our political process.
lulez:
http://www.37signals.com/svn/p…..on-the-web
Maybe California needs a referendum on whether Church’s should pay taxes. California is in a budget crisis that Arnold cannot solve. Punish the antigay churches scare them that if it passes in the economy other states will follow suit fast.
Plus we embarrass Arnold his failure to fix the budget the issue that he ran on is what gives us our opportunity.
If a church has a certain percentage of convicted pedophiles then they should loose their tax exempt status. If a church participates in harming the rights of citizens then God or god should make sure they/it are forced to stand in the corner of pergatory for a long time out.
Start by increasing the size of the legislature (currently: assembly 80; senate 40). Then make it a little more difficult to get initiatives on the ballot. (I’m tired of initiatives to handle things that should be straightforward legislative matters.)
Let’s keep violent suggestions off these pages please, even if they are just exercises.
Thanks.