Prop 8 in USCA9

LA Times, December 6, 2010:

Federal appeals court judges Monday seemed headed toward a decision that could reinstate same-sex marriages in California while avoiding a ruling of national sweep that would invite U.S. Supreme Court action.

Polemic, August 15, 2010: Prop 8 Rejection Might Be Limited to California

The technical action that the district court took in this case was to strike down Prop 8, which was a specific law enacted by the voters to repeal an existing right, as the Appellees note in their papers. It could arguably be the case that Prop 8 taking rights away is unconstitutional but that this does not compel it being granted elsewhere. If this is the case, it would mean that only in places where there is an existing state-based right to gay marriage would this apply. Splitting hairs? Yes. Some might call it “judicial minimalism.”

This is separate and distinct from the separate standing issue that many feel may cause this case to end before there is a total reckoning.

I don’t think this was put out there before by people at all. They were focused either on a sweeping Constitutional declaration of gay rights, or the cheap legal trick of using the standing issue.

I like my resolution better.