From the SF Chronicle:

State Attorney General Jerry Brown, in a surprise turnabout, asked the state Supreme Court late today to overturn Proposition 8, saying the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage violates basic rights guaranteed in the state Constitution.

Brown, whose office requires him to defend state laws unless he cannot find reasonable legal grounds to do so, said after Prop. 8 passed Nov. 4 that he would support the initiative before the state’s high court.

But in a lengthy filing late today, he argued that the measure was “inconsistent with the guarantees of individual liberty” in California’s governing charter.

“Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification,” Brown said.

Statement from Equality California Executive Director Geoff Kors on the Attorney General’s brief:

“Attorney General Brown’s position that Proposition 8 should be invalidated demonstrates that he is a leader of courage and conviction,” said Equality California Executive Director Geoff Kors. “We are very pleased that upon review of the law, he has moved from his previous statements that he would defend Prop 8. As the state’s highest attorney, Jerry Brown has done his job today to defend the Constitution and protect the rights of minority groups, including the more than 18,000 same-sex couples who married in California.”

yeah moonbeam!

Interesting turn of events. Good on the Constitution of California for upholding human rights!

Do you Lisa or you Teddy know why he reversed on this?

pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness?

I’m inclined to take Brown at his word that he studied the issue and came to this conclusion. As I understand things, it is unconstitutional for Californians to use ballot initiatives as a tool of discrimination. If so, it seems like it should be a pretty simple case for the Supreme Court but you never know.

Well, yeah. But, why didn’t he want those things right after the election?

Remember when he questioned the language before it went on the ballot? Or maybe I’m disremembering. At the time I wondered if he was looking for language that would let him ask for this request to overturn.
I sure hope they do.

More here:

The courts have previously said the right of a person to marry is protected as one of those inalienable rights, Brown wrote. The question at the center of the gay marriage cases, he told the justices, “is whether rights secured under the state Constitution’s safeguard of liberty as an ‘inalienable’ right may intentionally be withdrawn from a class of persons by an initiative amendment.” That, he concluded, should not be allowed.

Although voters are allowed to amend other parts of the Constitution by majority vote, to use the ballot box to take away an “inalienable” right would establish a “tyranny of the majority,” which the Constitution was designed, in part, to prevent, he wrote. “For we are talking, necessarily, about rights of individuals or groups against the larger community, and against the majority — even an overwhelming majority — of the society as a whole.”

looks like the h8ers are now trying to nullify the marriages performed – which causes harm. this is from cnn’s coverage and brown’s response to their suit:

“Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification,” Brown said in a written statement.

from that cnn piece – rick jacobs said:

Rick Jacobs, founder and chair of the anti-Proposition 8 Courage Campaign, said he was “appalled” that the initiative’s supporters wanted to nullify the same-sex marriages that are already on the books.

“The motivation behind this mean-spirited and heart-breaking action should not be allowed to be buried in legal brief,” he said. “If Proposition 8’s sponsors plan to destroy lives, they should at least have the courage to admit it publicly.”

Looks to me like the amendment should never have been allowed on the ballot. Not only from a moral point but from a legal point.

He is required by his job to defend stuff. He is the State Attorney General and his job is to defend the “state”. In this case it is the people who voted in favor of Prop H8te. I’m glad he still has the integrity he has always had – even though he has been made fun of and laughed at his whole political career.

I never laughed at him. I always thought he was cute in addition to having integrity.

It would be nice if Prop 8 were struck down in a way that makes it harder for the bigots to introduce a similar initiative in the future. Seems like it ought to have to pass some kind of constitutional litmus test before the state spends a truckload of money putting it to a vote, or litigating it’s viability afterwards.

didn’t San Jose sue right after the election, with SF, San Diego and LA joining the suit, alleging procedural irregularities in certification of the ballot measure without prior legislative action? what happened to that suit or is the one the court is hearing?

He still is! *g* I wasn’t referring to you specifically, but the ‘governor moonbeam’ thing was what I was referring to. I kindof view it as a fond pet-name now, but it was used in very derogatory fashion by his opponents when he was governor.

aren’t rethugs in MA still trying to override the courts and end gay marriage there?

Actually the argument is whether or not Prop H8te is an actual amendment – which requires a vote by the legislature before it has to be put on the ballot for ratification, or just a modification – which does not. The Prop H8te supporters are arguing that it is a definitional change and not an amendment (thank you very much Ken Starr) and everyone else is on the other side obviously.

Yep. I should have added a *g*.
Does anyone know if the court is basically the same as the previous one that overturned a similar bill?

Yup. Every session.

Wasn’t on our ballot this time – not enough support, i think. selise would know. just 4 initiatives 1- eliminate state income tax? (no) 2-make dog racing illegal (yes) 3- decriminalize marijuana (yes) and non-binding – study medicinal marijuana? (yes)

Oh, and good on you, AG Jerry Brown!

I think so, they’ll never give up. I don’t know when but one day a tipping point will be reached when there are enough same-sex marriages in the U.S. that opponents will finally have to accept it. I don’t think it will happen soon but with luck maybe within 20 years.

I’m pretty sure it is. In California, the Supremes are appointed in a vacancy, much the same as SCOTUS. However, they must be re-affirmed by the voters every so often – I think 12 years or so. It’s pretty unusual for that to happen, the last time I remember was the Rose Bird court – where the voters threw out 4 of the seven justices all at the same time over a bunch of absolutely ridiculous death-penalty cases. That was back in the late 80s I think.

The Supremes asked any petitioners to answer three questions: is Proposition 8 constitutional as an amendment, or is it a revision; should it be overturned; should the marriages be invalidated. Apparently, the Prop 8 folks are now claiming that Ken Starr’s response (that the marriages should be invalidated) was simply because the judges “made them do it.”

In other words, they’d rather not admit they lied previously when they said the marriages wouldn’t be harmed by Prop 8, but they had to come clean since the judges asked them.

Personally, I’m very glad we didn’t get married; I couldn’t stand to have the Mormon Church do any more violence to my partner’s family now than they did when he was young. We’ll just wait it out.

.0005625 percent of the 32 million population, 18,000 gay marraiges. I very very small segment of California population. Why violate constitutional rights to advance bigotry? Bad precedent for other groups as well.

dunno, reflection and perspective?

with so many Clinton people coming back into power I can’t help but hope that there’ll be some payback for Starr and ilk

Chief Justice Ron George is up for affirmation in 2010 I think. The wingnuts are already threatening to punk him. If his Court goes along with AG Brown and invalidates Prop 8, we’ll really need to have his back. In fact, I expect they will try to recall him before that.

(((Teddy & Partner)))

I’d like to make gay marriage mandatory for everyone, just to see the look on the haters’ faces.

Starr should be disbarred for misuse of federal funds under color of authority. His prurience nearly resulted in a coup-d’etat in this country. He should not be allowed near a courtroom, ever again, after what he put this nation through.

But who would ever marry Pastor Rick™?

Not holding my breath.

I’m sure we could find some huge tattoo-covered butch guy in San Quentin who would just looooove him to death. *g*

No offense intended to anyone. Since we would have to find someone who was really really really desperate…well..

shutting up now.

Starr and his Republican masters were under a lot of pressure to charge Clinton with SOMETHING after spending $40 million investigating Whitewater and coming up empty. Was it only fifteen years ago that $40 million seemed like a lot of money?

I would like to make all marriage illegal just to see the look on the haters’ faces.
Everyone would have to get divorced. All children would be bastards. Everyone
would be forced to go to hell. But think of the money we would save on lawyers.

Rick and the president-elect seem to be getting pretty chummy.

Actually, your comment made me laugh.
Tells you about my sick sense of humor tonight.

Or… Simply in a position of power.

I like this idea the best. We could go back to ‘jumping the broom’. Now that’s a traditional marriage! and to undo it you just jump over again. Backwards. Very neat and tidy.

HAHAHAHAHA!

I never want to marry, I just want to get divorced.

can’t agree more. people like that have to be taken down or they just keep coming back, again and again and again. He should’ve been disbarred.

and no one would ever be widowed again.
See, there is an upside to thinking outside of the wedding chapel.

Starr is gay. You know he is!

LOL! I guess that’d be scopa or, hrm, a ‘clean sweep!’

slaves had to ‘jump the broom’ because they were denied marriage. their vows were until death or distance us do part.

i see the h8r’s are repeating the biblical justification used in the 19th century to justify slavery to justify 21st century denials to gays.

its all the same hatred – my ex, the fundy, did not feel good unless he had made someone else feel bad first. then he knew he was a better person and was all happy.

Just be glad that in the “team of rivals” Starr wasn’t nominated for AG.

I never had a doubt.

It’s shocking that he is Dean of a law school in America.

That might be hard to do since Pastor Rick™ talks to God, I imagine he thinks he is pretty darn powerful himself. ‘Specially since he gets to tell all those thousands of people in his church what to think and what to do and who to like and who not to like etc etc etc.

If gay was OK it’d put a major kink, no pun intended, into the GOP blackmail industry.

… knew he was a better person than they were….

ironically, I think the haters would sooner end all legal sanction of marriages before they countenance acceptance of gay marriage. Once more states permit gay marriage, I predict that they’ll start taking this tack, arguing that marriage is only a religious sacrament/institution between a man and a woman and that it does not need to be blessed by color of authority.

Much less surprising that he is counsel to Blackwater.

a fundie law school

I feel in my heart that he seeks a ‘posiion of power.’ lol

I don’t really see how a gay man could get his panties all in a twist over Monica and Bill. Unless he’s seriously repressed and unknowing, but still — I think it’s more likely he’s just straight, narrow, and sex-obsessed. I certainly don’t want him on our team, and I am amazed at the tonedeafness of sending him to plead the Prop 8 case in front of the California Supremes.

The Prop 8 folks can’t possibly think Starr’ll get a good reception there, do they?

Wow, if it’s evil — you can count on Ken Starr being there.

I was just looking at that picture of Brown on the front page. He appears to be turning into Peter Boyle.

Sorry you had to go through that. Doesn’t sound like a very fun sort of person to be around.

I believe that in the original case – jumping the broom meant every bit as much to those individuals as the white dress chapel cake thingy. It is a public ritual to announce to the community at large (the other slaves) that these two people cared deeply for each other and were making a commitment (as much as they could at the time) to each other as well. I honor that ceremony as much as any other that has been devised and I was not making fun of it in that way.

It’s just that the fundies are always prating about ‘traditional’ marriage. Jumping the broom is a ‘traditional’ marriage used by a group of people to recognize their relationships.

i hope he is the only lawyer they could get

well, just fuck them and the whore they rode in on. Jeebus K. on a stick.

I believe that the fundies never, evah have any fun. Evah!!!!!! I imagine them drying off after a bath, rubbing the towel a little too hard, dropping to their knees and asking god to forgive them the sin of too much friction near the scared private area. The god area. The part that can NOT be acknowleged for any reason.

Ye gads, his repression is at parity with his obsession. A sick and twisted man.

jumping the broom was developed because legalized marriage was denied to them – it was a tradition they came up with to circumvent the denial of an inalienable right. jumping the broom was not recognized as a legal marriage by the slave owners nor the states.

Yea, that sucks and is abusive. Glad you’re outta there

The Mormons don’t have to worry about that since they bathe in their pantaloons. “g”

Delurking. LOL. Lurking.

I didn’t know hat history, it just made me think of ’scopa.’

well… I guess we can hope that he will one day have the honor of being shrub and Barnacle’s criminal defense attorney

Magic underwear decreed by your imaginary best friend in the sky.

I’m still trying to figure out how ‘marriage’ is a religious institution (according to the haters) when every ‘legal’ marriage in this country requires a license from the government to be recognized and valid. Just because preachers can perform these marriages along with justices of the peace and notaries and ship captains and those cheesy hucksters in Las Vegas and people who buy preacher credentials off the internet doesn’t make it a religious institution, since marriages performed by all those other people are just as valid.

Wow, that describes my ex perfectly. People like that shouldn’t be allowed to leave the house unless they’re wearing a sandwich board proclaiming to the world how malicious they are.

This one?
http://icanhascheezburger.file…..cation.jpg

What I can’t figure out is why these people care. They may think they are religious but they most certainly are not.

Of course they can. They still think they ‘won’ by painting Clinton as some sort of…hmm…oh yeah, liar. Even though he was not convicted of anything. And there was nothing else in that $70 million pornographic report that Clinton did other than lie. About an affair he was having with a younger woman. Who admitted that she started it.

So they think Ken Starr is absolutely brilliant. (NOT!) But you know how Rethugs think…

Oh, no — the magic underwear is decreed by your imaginary best friend in the sky’s best friend on earth, Teh Prophet, the spiritual descendant of a guy who found a bunch of gold plates but then lost them in a nuclear explosion when Xenu came to earth.

julia up at the mothership

Rethugs think???

kitteh told me to wear panties, honest!

That would be the one.

My rule is that if you have to tell me that you are a Christian, you aren’t. If you were, I would know it just by being around you.

Attic Cat!

Well, there is this lizard-brain little process that goes on. It’s the thing that operates their mouths. And certain other naughty-parts.

Republicans seem to have serious sexual problems. Remember this, anyone?

http://www.voxfux.com/features…..anklin.htm

along with his friends at the fundie American Center for Law and Justice, Starr is a truly evil man. His actions in a particularly perverse Tennessee case involving attempts to protect fundie child mass murderers (baby farmers) by persecuting their surviving victims, long before any of this other shite happened, is why I became a liberal in the first place. I was volunteering with a civil rights advocacy group offering services to the victims, whom the fundie lawyers were traumatizing with all sorts of harassment.

I understand Suz. I am just saying that in terms of what these fundies are always yelling about ‘traditional’ marriage that a tradition is and can be started by anyone. I know that it was not ‘recognized’ by the state or the slave-owners. Gays now have commitment ceremonies in states where their ‘marriages’ are not recognized by the state. I honor those commitment ceremonies as well. A true marriage is in the hearts and minds of the participants and those who love and care about them.

It is unfortunate that the ‘institution’ of marriage has become a legal construct, one that either confers or denies rights based on who you are. It has been used as a weapon against slaves, mixed-race couples, people with certain types of mental and physical disabilities, gays and lesbians, and I’m sure there are more on the list. It is equally unfortunate that these rights include stuff like hospital visitation rights (who are a bunch of medical people to decide who your ‘family’ is?), tax benefits, property rights, rights to your own children, and all the rest of it. Very unfortunate.

But that’s just my humble opinion. My daughter was married in a Wiccan ceremony by a de-frocked Catholic priest. I honor that marriage as well. Fortunately, the not-priest was still able to perform the ‘legal’ part of signing the ‘legal’ papers. That piece of paper is what causes all the problems. For everyone. And after the ceremony, the best man cut off all relations with her husband because of this ‘heathen, devil-worshiping mess’. Nice. So even having that stupid piece of paper doesn’t protect you from people’s prejudices and hate.

Did you ever see this one? A widow fought for, and finally won the right to put the Wiccan symbol on her husband’s grave marker. OK to die in a war, but not ok to choose his own religious believes. Freedom of religion is supposed to be guaranteed in the US.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories…..7981.shtml

Here in Canada, having the issue settled by the the supreme court made a huge difference – gay marriage very quickly became a non-issue. People kind of looked around and realized that the sky had not fallen and civilization-as-we-know-it had not crumbled and just pretty much stfu. Doubtless there are are individuals and groups (like some churches) that truly loathe and despise gay marriage – but as a subject for public discussion? Gone.

Brown has waffled on and off about just about everything in his career, depending on which way he thought the political winds and tides were moving.

I consider him to be as fit for a high level position in politics as much as I consider Ahnald to be.

Which is, NOT AT ALL!

Brown’s jumping on a bandwagon cuz he’s gonna run for Governor again. If I were a member of he LGBT community, I’d not trust him one iota, regardless of WHAT he tries to bring to Prop 8.

I’d think his past history in CA Politics has proven his competency as a leader. He’s a failure, proven over and over.

I think Brown makes a very good argument.

Yes, and I was cheering her on. Wicca is a recognized religion by the Department of Defense and the US Government. The fact that whoever was in charge of that cemetery wouldn’t let her do that was just unconscionable. He fought for this country. The excuse was that the families of the people who were buried next to him would ‘be offended’. Screw them!

Jerry Brown is one of the best things to happen to California. I’m thrilled he was first mayor of Oakland–talk about trial by fire–no possibility of hiding behind do-gooder white liberalism when you’re faced with the real thing–and now, thank goodness, AG.

I’m thrilled he’s taking on Prop 8. Someone has to . This is a fundamental right.

You do know that he was the governor of California before he was mayor of Oakland…

Marriage began being registered by the church because it was necessary to track births, baptisms, marriages and deaths. The State co-opted the system not long afterwards. Registering vital events was necessary (among the nobility, at least) for tracking property rights. In most of Western Europe, primogeniture was practiced, so it had to be known who the eldest living legitimate son and heir was.

So it all started with the Church tracking its sacraments, the State got involved to protect property rights. As the system evolved in Europe, couples had to go to their local registrar to take care of the paperwork there. Then they went and found the clergycritter of their choice to handle the Flying Spaghetti Monster. With our American genius for conflating things, we fucked it up. We still have to go to the County Clerk’s office for a license, but then we have to find some other authority to handle the signing, etc.

When a couple stand before the congregation and are pronounced spouses, they aren’t married yet. The license has to be signed, witnessed and sent off to the State Vital Statistics Bureau. Once the documents are received and recorded by the Vital Statistics Bureau, then (and only then) are they married.

There is no reason in the world we can’t bifurcate the system again. Go to the County Clerk’s office, pay the license fee, etc. Sign the thing and witness it — every County Clerk’s office has at least half-a-dozen notaries. Ship it off to the capital. Haul a temporary endorsed copy off to the clergy-critter of the appropriate sect, and have her (him?) do that voodoo the she (he?) do so well. If you don’t need the Flying Spaghetti Monster’s blessing, then don’t bother with phase 2. If you need to visit the nearest LDS temple for Joe Smith’s blessing, well, go.

In the eyes of the State, you’re married once the paperwork is filed. The State really shouldn’t care who you’re marrying, with exceptions for protecting the incompetent. Like kids, people who are non compos mentis, etc.

The slippery slope argument just doesn’t apply here. The State is perfectly competent to make rules for marriage like, “Only one to a customer,” or “Only one at a time to a customer.” We’re not going to let paedophiles marry prepubescent children, nor will we automatically decide to permit polygamous or polyandrous relationships to be recognized.

Brown was not a great mayor for Oakland (as an Oaklander I get to say that), but at heart he’s a rational being with a real devotion to the Constitution and to the law. It’s damn good to see him applying himself to do the right thing here.

My contempt for Ken Starr, on the other hand, knows no bounds. (h/t Dear Leader Jane.)

Looks to me like the amendment should never have been allowed on the ballot. Not only from a moral point but from a legal point.

It appears to me that one of the biggest problems in CA is that people put initiatives on the ballot and con the public into supporting them when the initiative really means something altogether different.

Three Strikes was like that: people didn’t realize a strike could be something felonious, but not violent. Now they’re drowning in red ink from all their prison spending and Prop 13 won’t let them raise taxes to pay for it.

I lived in California for almost 30 years and have been gone from there for about 4. But I thought that there was a requirement that a proposition had to be ‘vetted’ by some court or committee of judges to pass constitutional muster before it did go on the ballot since there had been a rash of obviously unconstitutional stuff, some of which had passed and the State had to spend a lot of money on legal fees as a result. So I’m wondering what exactly happened in this case?

I’m not sure the court system is the best way to win the gay marriage fight. I know that will probably upset some people but I worry that in the long run it could do more harm than good. Majorities of many states have passed anti-gay marriage amendments and a decision by the courts on Marriage could be the catalyst for a successful attempt to amend the US Constitution to define marriage as exclusively heterosexual. That would make it impossible to win for another generation.

Jerry Brown was governor of Calif and while he was governor had the wacky idea of, ready for it…recycling. That is one of the reasons he was called governor Moonbeam. His father was also the Guv of Calif and lost re-election to a Hollywood actor named Rayguns. His sister ran for Governor and lost to some guy name Wilson, I think.

He was not a good mayor of Oakland but his replacement, Ron Dellums, makes Brown look like a frigging statesman.

If he saves my institutional marriage from the crown with pitchforks and torches I will be indebted to him for my lifetime. Of course, this does not mean he gets my vote, just my gratitude. After this last election I will be much more wary with my vote because who knows who will be speaking at the swearing-in ceremony. A homophobic minister perhaps who would never let me be part of his church, as if I wanted to be part of the pitchforks and torches set.

Who can forget the sight of Starr every morning during Monicagate walking out of his house with a bag of garbage to put in the trash. He’s still walking around with a bag of garbage.

Let’sa hear it for Linda Ronstadt’s ex-boyfriend!

I think this is making a mistake. This tactic probably just creates extra backlash.

There’s my Monday morning quarterbacking for ya…