(dKos link. Here's an ActBlue Page to fight against the marriage initiative. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
4-3 DECISION!! THE GOOD GUYS AND GALS WON!!!!! The decision can be read here. The conclusion of the majority is: in light of the conclusions we reach concerning the constitutional questions brought to us for resolution, we determine that the language of section 300 limiting the designation of marriage to a union “between a man and a woman” is unconstitutional and must be stricken from the statute, and that the remaining statutory language must be understood as making the designation of marriage available both to opposite-sex and same-sex couples. In addition, because the limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples imposed by section 308.5 can have no constitutionally permissible effect in light of the constitutional conclusions set forth in this opinion, that provision cannot stand.
The Court goes on to say: " Plaintiffs are entitled to the issuance of a writ of mandate directing the appropriate state officials to take all actions necessary to effectuate our ruling in this case so as to ensure that county clerks and other local officials throughout the state, in performing their duty to enforce the marriage statutes in their jurisdictions, apply those provisions in a manner consistent with the decision of this court. Hmmm, "appropriate state official"? Who might that be? Oh yeah, Mark Leno! And a nice little touch concludes the directive: "Further, as the prevailing parties, plaintiffs are entitled to their costs." Ha!! Take that bigots! Justices Baxtar, Corrigan, and Chin dissented. All of them, however, wrote that they believe that same sex marriages should be recognized. However, they do not believe that the Constitution mandates such recognition. |
