The reviews keep coming in. This Prop 8 decision is clearly going to be a headache for Obama.

David Dayen at FDL weighs in:

In the wake of the historic ruling in the Prop 8 case, the President has decided on a very strange locution to describe his views on the matter. He says, through aides, that he personally opposes gay marriage but supports “equality”. David Axelrod made a go at this pretzel logic today...

It’s true that the President opposed Prop 8 – but his tortured logic on the subject allowed supporters of Prop 8 to use his likeness and his words in their advertising. The idea of personal opposition but support of vagaries like “equality” is typical of how Democrats think they can thread the needle on these kinds of issues. It makes them look terribly weak.

And the LGBT community has had it.

Opposing Prop 8 and opposing marriage equality is a contradiction in terms. And it will always be used by opponents of equality to divide people. It leaves a very troubled legacy for the President on an issue of civil rights. He’s obviously too cautious to step out on such a controversial issue. He should get over it and do what’s right.

Read More...

Greg Sargent on why Prop 8 will cause more problems for the White House

Greg Sargent's Plum Line:

Is Obama's position on gay marriage sustainable?

That seems to be one of the core political question in the wake of the decision to overturn Proposition 8. How can the president continue opposing gay marriage while supporting the decision to strike down Prop 8, on the grounds that it's "discriminatory," as the White House said in a statement last night?

Making it more dicey, the White House statement also said that the president continues to push for "full equality" for gay and lesbian couples. How can that not include support for gay marriage?

The problem for the White House is that the Prop 8 decision will force this issue onto full boil nationally, just as the Arizona law did with illegal immigration. And heading into his 2012 reelection campaign, the gay and lesbian community -- an important Dem constiuency -- will be demanding full support for gay marriage, and a repeal of DOMA.

They'll be demanding complete consistency, and won't want to be lectured about what is and isn't possible amid some arbitrarily defined "political reality."

Read More...

Prop 8 ruling puts Obama on the spot

Josh Gerstein at Politico argues that the Obama administration has systematically tried to put what it considers "controversial" social issues, like gays, guns and abortion, on the backburner. So when victories like the Prop 8 decision in California thrust gay rights back into the news, it makes things uncomfortable for the President.

Sorry our civil rights make you uncomfortable. But we're not going away. Nor are our increasing legal victories. Nor is our increasing acceptance in society. Nor is our increasing intolerance for Democrats who find our quest for full citizenship "uncomfortable."

I know it upsets some of our friends to hear us talk about the President in this way, but they fail to understand a fundamental point. The gay community, and our friends, are tired of being second class citizens. And yes, we are second-class citizens. Everyone out there, raise your hands if you can get married to the person you love.

Once upon a time, it was just the "gay activists" who got upset when Democrats - all politicians, really - didn't support full equality. But over the past ten years or so, something changed. And over the past two years, since Prop 8 repealed marriage in California, that change accelerated at an exponential rate. Gay people, and our allies, are no longer wiling to tolerate "separate but equal" Democrats who think that showing up a fundraising dinner, or inviting us to a cocktail, is enough to buy our votes and our money. It's not. Not any longer.

The Prop 8 decision is a big problem for Barack Obama. He needs to decide what side of history he wants to be on. Because currently, by giving his Justice Department the go ahead to oppose our civil rights in lawsuit after lawsuit, he's on the side as the bigots who once refused to let his parents marry.

Please sign our open letter to the President, urging him to come out in support of full marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples. Then tell your friends by Twitter, Facebook, and beyond. Read More...

'The president does oppose same-sex marriage but he supports equality for gay and lesbian couples' - Axelrod to MSNBC

Say again?


Axelrod's point, if you watch the video, is that the President is for "separate but equal" benefits for gay couples. Putting aside the obvious horror of that statement, we can't get "equal" benefits because of DOMA. That would be the law that the President routinely defends in court against our civl rights challenges, and the law about which the President has done nothing to get repealed, even though he promised to repeatedly during the campaign.

This is the key quote:

The president opposed Proposition 8 at the time. He felt that it was divisive. He felt that it was mean-spirited, and he opposed it at the time. So we reiterated that position yesterday. The president does oppose same-sex marriage, but he supports equality for gay and lesbian couples, and benefits and other issues, and that has been effectuated in federal agencies under his control. He's supports civil unions, and that's been his position throughout. So nothing has changed.

Actually, a lot has changed. And, Obama's position has to change. Please sign our open letter to President Obama asking him to come out in support of full marriage equality. It's time for Obama to get on the right side of history. And, we have to let him know that's where he needs to be. We won't accept separate, but equal. Read More...

VIDEO Olson and Boies on Rachel

Read More...

EIGHTY Findings of FACT in Prop 8 Case

I'm not an attorney, but I know that findings of fact are far more weighty because appellate courts defer to them more than conclusions of law. Dahlia Lithwick has a nice article over at Slate and reports Judge Walker had eighty Findings of Fact - EIGHTY!

Then come the elaborate "findings of fact"—and recall that appellate courts must defer far more to a judge's findings of fact than conclusions of law. Here is where Judge Walker knits together the trial evidence, to the data, to the nerves at the very base of Justice Kennedy's brain. Among his most notable determinations of fact, Walker finds: states have long discriminated in matters of who can marry; marital status affects immigration, citizenship, tax policy, property and inheritance rules, and benefits programs; that individuals do not choose their own sexual orientation; California law encourages gay couples to become parents; domestic partnership is a second-class legal status; permitting same-sex couples to marry does not affect the number of opposite-sex couples who marry, divorce, cohabit, or otherwise screw around. He found that it benefits the children of gay parents to have them be married and that the gender of a child's parent is not a factor in a child's adjustment. He found that Prop 8 puts the force of law behind a social stigma and that the entirety of the Prop 8 campaign relied on instilling fears that children exposed to the concept of same-sex marriage may become gay. (Brand-new data show that the needle only really moved in favor of the Prop 8 camp when parents of young children came out in force against gay marriage in the 11th hour of the campaign.) He found that stereotypes targeting gays and lesbians have resulted in terrible disadvantages for them and that the Prop 8 campaign traded on those stereotypes.

Good article by Lithwick, and I'm impressed at how extensively Judge Walker filleted the defense of Proposition 8.

More from Joe: Zack Ford has a post listing all 80 of those important Findings of Fact:

This is the series of 80 points Judge Walker used to organize the multitudes of information in the case. Note that these are not all the ideas that were presented in the case; these are the facts used in the decision.

These concise points address the information presented in trial amazingly. They are straight-forward and compelling. Here is, essentially, what everyone should learn from this trial.

Read More...

VIDEO: When the crowd in SF learned about the Prop. 8 decision

A couple weeks ago, we posted a video of the crowd reaction at the moment when Argentina's Senate passed marriage equality. I titled the post, "Someday. Someday, we'll have a moment like this."

Yesterday, in California, there was a moment that came close -- when the crowd found out that Prop. 8 is unconstitutional.

We need more of these moments. Read More...

VIDEO: Rachel Maddow on Prop 8 decision

Read More...

AFA bigots lose it over Prop 8 decision

Via Joe My God:

“This is a tyrannical, abusive and utterly unconstitutional display of judicial arrogance. Judge Walker has turned ‘We the People’ into ‘I the Judge.' It’s inexcusable for him to deprive the citizens of California of their right to govern themselves, and cavalierly trash the will of over seven million voters. This case never should even have entered his courtroom. The federal constitution nowhere establishes marriage policy, which means under the 10th Amendment that issue is reserved for the states."

Sounds to me like the same excuse used for sending black kids to separate schools, and having different drinking fountains for the different races. If the people are supreme. over the courts, then Brown v Board and Loving v Virginia were wrongly decided. And the religious right needs to drop the canard about "gay is not black." That isn't even the issue. They are arguing that courts are not permitted to overrule the people. So were the major civil rights decisions of the 1900s wrongly decided? Read More...

Olbermann on marriage (again): 'It is solely a question of love'

Tonight, Keith Olbermann replayed his comment on Prop. 8 from November 10, 2008.
Read More...

WH aide makes it clear: Obama does not support marriage equality

So, we've got the answer to the question of whether the President supports the Prop. 8 decision. Not really.

Earlier today, a White House spokesperson provided a tepid statement earlier today to Kerry Eleveld:

“The President has spoken out in opposition to Proposition 8 because it is divisive and discriminatory. He will continue to promote equality for LGBT Americans.”

Clearly, we have different definitions of what LGBT equality means. For LGBT Americans, it means full equality. For Obama, it means separate, but equal:

Nevertheless, Obama has also publicly opposed same-sex marriage, and a White House aide said the president’s position has not changed.

“He supports civil unions, doesn’t personally support gay marriage though he supports repealing the Defense of Marriage Act, and has opposed divisive and discriminatory initiatives like Prop. 8 in other states,” said the official, who asked not to be named.

That might have worked in 2008. It won't work in 2012.

And, this "White House aide" spoke anonymously. Can some reporter, maybe at the briefing, get this on-the-record?

If Obama wants to "promote equality for LGBT Americans," he can support full equality, not "separate, but equal" civil unions. That's so 2008. And, it has to change.

Please sign our open letter to President Obama asking him to come out in support of full marriage equality. It's time for Obama to get on the right side of history. And, we have to let him know that's where he needs to be. Read More...

The Religious Right is freaking and fighting over Prop. 8

Pam has the email from NOM's Brian Brown:

This is a ruling that not only ignores the clear, legally-enacted will of the people of California, but jeopardizes the marriage laws of 45 states and threatens to strip millions of Americans of our core civil right to vote for marriage. We will fight back! Details to follow . . . .

We'll be fighting harder, Brian. We want our equality. At the Courage Campaign Prop 8 Trial Tracker, Adam Bink reports that Brian blew off a conference call with supporters tonight. Jeremy Hooper has more on the NOM fail.

Via press release, Robert Knight, who claims to be the author of DOMA, is asking for prayers:

“The judge’s contempt for the rule of law and a constitutionally guaranteed self-governing republic cannot be overemphasized,” said Robert Knight, Senior Writer and Washington , D.C. Correspondent for Coral Ridge Ministries , who was a draftsman of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. “With courts turning traditional values into a form of ‘hate’ actionable under the law, we are seeing the criminalization of not only Christianity but of the foundational values of civilization itself.

“As the case heads to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and eventually to the Supreme Court, Americans need to pray that the judges diligently seek wisdom before ruling. And we urge our constituents to encourage public officials to support ways to stop the judicial wrecking ball from further damaging God’s oldest human institution – marriage.”

And, from Jim Burroway at Box Turtle Bulletin, an intra-right wing blame game is underway:

This is hilarious. Matt Staver’s Liberty Counsel, which is closely aligned with Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University, issued a press release blaming the Prop 8 decision on the Alliance Defense Fund.

Have at it.

Of course, the religious right does have Newt Gingrich and Mary Matalin on their side. Both of them are huge proponents of marriage, having each been married three times. Rush will undoubtedly weigh in tomorrow. He's been married four times. Read More...

Hypocrisy alert: Thrice married Newt upset about Prop. 8 decision

I have to give Newt the award for chutzpah, so far anyway. He's really upset about the Prop. 8 decision and worried about is impact on marriage:

Judge Walker's ruling overturning Prop 8 is an outrageous disrespect for our Constitution and for the majority of people of the United States who believe marriage is the union of husband and wife. In every state of the union from California to Maine to Georgia, where the people have had a chance to vote they've affirmed that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Congress now has the responsibility to act immediately to reaffirm marriage as a union of one man and one woman as our national policy.

For Newt, marriage has been the union of one man and one woman. Then, one man and another woman. Then, one man and a third woman.

How about we change the law to make marriage the union of one man and one woman ONLY?

Seriously, what a hypocrite.

Via Newt's wikipedia page:

Gingrich has been married three times. He first married Jackie Battley, his former high school geometry teacher, when he was 19 years old and she was 26.[55][56] They had two daughters. Gingrich left Battley in the spring of 1980. According to Battley, Gingrich visited her later that year while she was in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery to discuss the details of their divorce. Six months after it was final, Gingrich wed Marianne Ginther in 1981.[57][58]

Gingrich began an affair with Callista Bisek, who is 23 years his junior, in the mid nineties, which continued during the Congressional investigation of Bill Clinton and the Lewinsky scandal.[59] In 2000, Gingrich married Bisek shortly after his divorce with second wife Ginther was finalized. He and Callista currently live in McLean, Virginia.[60]

Read More...

Reactions to the historic Prop. 8 decision -- with updates

First, the most important reaction we won't hear is from President Obama. That has to change. Please sign our open letter to President Obama asking him to come out in support of full marriage equality. It's time.

[UPDATE, via Kerry Eleveld, the White House did put out a statement:

“The President has spoken out in opposition to Proposition 8 because it is divisive and discriminatory. He will continue to promote equality for LGBT Americans.”

Note to White House: Obama can promote LGBT equality by supporting marriage and by ending the defense of DOMA and DADT in courts.

NOTE FROM JOHN: Wow, really? Did the White House just say that they agreed with the federal court's reasoning that "no rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license." Really? I doubt it. I think the White House just tried to have its cake and eat it too - sound supportive, but not dare embrace the decision itself. But now that they've weighed in, and tried to make it look like they're on our side in this case - they are such great self-proclaimed champions of LGBT equality, they'd have you remember - it's time for the White House to answer the question, do they agree with the ruling or not? Maybe you should sign our open letter to the President and ask him.]

We're getting a ton of statements via email. Here's a sampling. We'll keep adding to it. Also, the decision has been stayed until August 6th, via Lisa Keen.

Ted Olson:

"We came to court to seek for Kris, Sandy, Paul and Jeff the same right to marry that all other Americans enjoy, and to ensure that they receive equal protection under the law as guaranteed to every American by the Constitution. Through its decision today, the court has acted in the best traditions of a legal system established to uphold the Constitution and the principles of equality upon which this nation was founded. On no less than 14 occasions, the Supreme Court has held that marriage is a fundamental right. This decision recognizes that Proposition 8 denied the plaintiffs, and tens-of-thousands of other Californians, that fundamental constitutional right and treated them unequally."

David Boies:

“The Supreme Court has long held that marriage is a fundamental right. Equal protection under the law is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, and this ruling affirms that universal right of every American. Depriving the fundamental right to marry causes grievous harm to millions of Americans and their children.”

Governor Schwarzenegger, who is the defendant in the case, but didn't defend it. (Meaning we need to make sure that Jerry Brown is elected Governor. GOPer Meg Whitman supported Prop. 8):

"For the hundreds of thousands of Californians in gay and lesbian households who are managing their day-to-day lives, this decision affirms the full legal protections and safeguards I believe everyone deserves. At the same time, it provides an opportunity for all Californians to consider our history of leading the way to the future, and our growing reputation of treating all people and their relationships with equal respect and dignity.

"Today's decision is by no means California's first milestone, nor our last, on America's road to equality and freedom for all people.'

Congressman Paul Hodes (also a candidate for Senate in New Hampshire):

The U.S. District Court of Northern California's decision to strike down Proposition 8 is a huge win in our ongoing fight for equality.

There is much work still to be done, and many more battles to face – but the march toward universal marriage equality continues. It's time that the Defense of Marriage Act was repealed once and for all. When I get to the US Senate, I will lead the charge to repeal DOMA and ensure equal rights and protections for every citizen in this country.

I am thrilled with today’s ruling, and more determined than ever to repeal DOMA and help achieve universal marriage equality for all Americans.

Activist Charlene Strong:

“Today’s ruling is very good news. LGBT rights are not special rights. These are human rights. Anyone who says otherwise, that all citizens are not entitled full equality in our country is speaking from their own personal bias and nothing more. This has nothing to do with sexuality and everything to do with who you love.... I am an American and I am proud of that. I am not fighting for my rights alone -- I am standing up and fighting for every gay and lesbian couple who pay their taxes, contribute to society and who want the same protections every other American is afforded if and when they choose to marry."

Rick Jacobs from the Courage Campaign:

"This ruling is an historic milestone for millions of loving families, for all who have fought to realize the dream of equality under the law, and for our nation as a whole. While today concludes the first step in a legal process that could take up to two years, Judge Walker's ruling is a landmark victory in America's centuries long war against discrimination, and the result of months of extraordinary work by the American Foundation for Equal Rights, Attorneys David Boies and Ted Olson, and courageous plaintiffs Kris Perry, Sandy Stier, Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo."

Former White House Chief of Staff, now President of the Center for American Progress (CAP) John Podesta:

"Judge Walker’s decision reaffirms the Constitution’s command that all Americans must receive ‘equal protection of the laws.’ Prop 8 is incompatible with our Constitution and a long line of precedent rejecting laws that single out a certain class of Americans for disfavored legal status. Today’s decision does nothing more than restore the Constitution’s promise to millions of American couples. Because Constitutional precedent so clearly rejects Prop 8, I have every confidence that this decision will be upheld on appeal."

Evan Wolfson, Freedom to Marry:

"Today's federal ruling strikes down a cruel and unfair constitutional amendment that should never have become law and affirms that the freedom to marry belongs to every American. As the first court to strike down race restrictions on marriage said in 1948, "the essence of the right to marry is freedom to join in marriage with the person of one's choice." There is no gay exception in the Constitution to personal choice and the right to marry, and there is no good reason to continue excluding same-sex couples from marriage.

Judge Walker's decision will be appealed and litigation will continue, but what we witnessed in the clear light of his courtroom cannot be erased.

Judy Shepard:

After Matt came out to me, he once asked me if I thought gay couples would ever be allowed to get married. I told him I didn't think it would happen in my lifetime, but it probably would in his. It's so sad, and ironic, that it turned out the other way. But this case warms my heart, to think that his dream is still coming true.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (who, though straight, is the best LGBT member of Congress:

“Today’s court ruling on Proposition 8 is a powerful declaration for those of us who believe in equal protection for all Americans. This affirmation of marriage equality in our nation’s most populous state shows, once again, that laws preventing same-sex couples from marrying serve no legitimate purpose, and that efforts to deprive gay men and lesbians of fundamental rights and to single them out for discrimination are anathema to our constitutional system. As Judge Walker recognized, like opposite-sex couples, ‘same-sex couples have happy, satisfying relationships and form deep emotional bonds and strong commitments to their partners . . . . love [does] not differ depending on whether a couple is same-sex or opposite-sex.’ I join Californians in celebrating this victory, and urge passage of my legislation, the Respect for Marriage Act, in order to provide all legally married Americans and their families the full measure of protections and obligations of federal law.”

DNC Chair Tim Kaine:

I applaud the U.S. District Court’s ruling today striking down Proposition 8 in California. The Democratic Party opposes attempts to discriminatorily limit rights granted to Americans, and Proposition 8 was just such an attempt. Discrimination against same-sex couples should not be added to constitutions – which are documents meant fundamentally to protect citizens against discrimination. As a former civil rights attorney, it pleases me to see this principle upheld and to see America take another step in the march towards greater equality.

Statements from the Task Force is here. HRC's is here. Read More...

BREAKING: Prop. 8 is unconstitutional

(Please sign our open letter to President Obama asking him to come out in support of full marriage equality.)

A victory for equality today. Judge Walker ruled that Proposition 8 violates the due process and equal protections clauses of Fourteenth amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Judge Walker stated that strict scrutiny should be applied when sexual orientation is implicated, but that Prop. 8 failed on the rational basis test (the lowest standard of review, which is the same standard used by Judge Trauro to declare DOMA unconstitutional.)

More details as they unfold.

We know one thing for sure: We're heading to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.

UPDATE: Here's Judge Walker's conclusion:

Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.

The Judge did not issue a stay, as requested by the anti-gay forces. In the remedies, Judge Walker enjoined enforcement of Prop. 8:

REMEDIES

Plaintiffs have demonstrated by overwhelming evidence that Proposition 8 violates their due process and equal protection rights and that they will continue to suffer these constitutional violations until state officials cease enforcement of Proposition 8. California is able to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, as it has already issued 18,000 marriage licenses to same-sex couples and has not suffered any demonstrated harm as a result, see FF 64-66; moreover, California officials have chosen not to defend Proposition 8 in these proceedings.

Because Proposition 8 is unconstitutional under both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses, the court orders entry of judgment permanently enjoining its enforcement; prohibiting the official defendants from applying or enforcing Proposition 8 and directing the official defendants that all persons under their control or supervision shall not apply or enforce Proposition 8. The clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment without bond in favor of plaintiffs and plaintiff-intervenors and against defendants and defendant-intervenors pursuant to FRCP 58.

The decision has been posted at Scribd.com
FF_&_CL_FINAL Read More...