Perry v. Schwarzenegger
From lawbrain.com
Perry v. Schwarzenegger is a lawsuit filed by two homosexual couples against California government officials and supporters of Proposition 8, a ballot initiative approved by a majority of California voters on November 4, 2008 that modified California's constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage.
The lawsuit was filed in federal district court in the Northern District of California on May 22, 2009 and the trial began on January 11, 2010.
On August 4, 2010, a federal court judge ruled that the voter-approved Proposition 8 was unconstitutional, violating the Due Process and the Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.[1]
Following Judge Walker's decision, an appeal was filed with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. A randomly-selected three judge panel will hear this case. After the panel reaches a decision, an en banc hearing will likely be requested. [2]
- This LawBrain entry is about a current or emerging court case. You can update the article with new information and sources. Click the 'Edit' tab above to add to this page.
Contents |
Overview
Perry v. Schwarzenegger is notable for several reasons. First, it is a high-profile challenge to a restriction on same-sex marriage under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. As such, there is a high likelihood that the case could will end up before the United States Supreme Court. This could turn Perry v. Schwarzenegger into a watershed civil rights case.
The plaintiffs in the case are represented by an unlikely pair of well-known attorneys. Theodore "Ted" Olson represented George W. Bush in Bush v. Gore, while David Boies represented Vice President Al Gore in the case. Ted Olson later served as Solicitor General during the Bush presidency, and is a prominent conservative Republican. David Boies on the other hand is a famously liberal Democrat. Same-sex marriage supporters initially questioned Olson's motivations for taking the suit and expressed concern that his intention was to sabotage the lawsuit from the inside.
Legal Developments
Perry v. Schwarzenegger reignited the long-running debate on cameras inside of federal courtrooms. Chief Judge Vaughn Walker, the presiding judge in the case, initially ruled that video recordings of the proceedings could appear on YouTube. Supporters of Prop 8 filed an emergency appeal with the US Supreme Court, arguing that their witnesses would be subject to harassment based on their views and positions in the case. The U.S. Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting broadcasts of the trial on January 11, 2009.[3] On January 13, 2009 the Supreme Court split along ideological lines and issued a majority opinion upholding the temporary restraining order.
On August 4, 2010, Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker issued a 136-page opinion[4] overturning Proposition 8 as a violation of the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. The court held that Proposition 8 unconstitutionally burdens the fundamental right to marry and creates an irrational classification on the basis of sexual orientation.
A stay was instituted against Judge Walker's opinion and this stay was subsequently lifted on August 12, 2010. Same-sex marriages may now resume after August 18, 2010, although proponents of Proposition 8 may obtain a stay from a higher federal court. If that fails, then a permanent stay may be obtained from the U.S. Supreme Court.[5]
References
- ↑ http://blogs.findlaw.com/courtside/2010/08/judge-overturns-californias-proposition-8.html
- ↑ http://blogout.justout.com/?p=20392
- ↑ http://www.mercurynews.com/samesexmarriage/ci_14165465
- ↑ http://blogs.findlaw.com/courtside/2010/08/judge-overturns-californias-proposition-8.html
- ↑ http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/08/12/2039353/capitol-alert-judge-removes-stay.html
External Links
- Judge strikes down ban on same-sex marriage (SF Gate)
- Judge overturns Calif. gay marriage ban (AP)
- Court Rejects Same-Sex Marriage Ban in California (New York Times
Related Resources on FindLaw
- Judge Overturns California's Proposition 8
- The Olson/Boies Challenge to California's Proposition 8: A High-Risk Effort
- The Ongoing Proposition 8 Trial: Three Key Points About the Evidence and Arguments
- Is DOMA -- the Defense of Marriage Act -- Valid? A Federal District Court Judge Says No
- Perry v. Proposition Official Proponents (November 19, 2009)
- Perry v. Schwarzenegger (December 11, 2009)
- Perry City and County of San Francisco v. Arnold Schwarzenegger, in his official capacity as Governor of California; Edmund G. Bro.. (December 11, 2009)
- Perry v. Schwarzenegger (April 12, 2010)
Related Blogs on FindLaw
- Judge Overturns California's Proposition 8 - - CourtSide
- A federal judge in San Francisco has ruled that California's Proposition 8, a voter-approved amendment to the state... [?]
- Case Summaries: Find Court Opinions on Family Law in AZ, CA ...
- In Perry v. Schwarzenegger, No. 10-16751, an appeal by the County of Imperial, its Board of Supervisors, and a Deputy Clerk for the County from ... [?]
- Prop 8 Found Unconstitutional by Federal Court - Civil Rights ...
- In the much anticipated opinion in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the... - Civil Rights Law [?]
- Cal. Sup. Ct. Won't Force Gov, AG to Defend Prop 8 - Civil ...
- This week the California Supreme Court set up another sign-post on the legal road for Perry v. Schwarzenegger,... - Civil Rights Law [?]
- Update on the Olson-Boies Prop 8 Lawsuit - Civil Rights ...
- The lawsuit, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, challenges California's ban on gay marriage as an unconstitutional denial of equal protection and due process. ... [?]
Web Services by Yahoo!
See Also
- Gay Marriage Legislation
- Due Process of Law
- Equal Protection
- Constitution of the United States
- Domestic Partnership Law
- Defense of Marriage Act of 1996
Contributors
FindLaw John, FindLaw Michelle, FindLaw Nira, FindLaw Sarah, FindLaw Support
