High-stakes gay marriage trial to begin in Calif.

[Rick336]

From Yahoo News:

High-stakes gay marriage trial to begin in Calif.

By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer Lisa Leff, Associated Press Writer – Thu Jan 7, 2010

SAN FRANCISCO – The national debate over same-sex marriage will take center stage in a California courtroom next week at a closely watched federal trial that could ultimately become the landmark case that determines whether gay Americans have a right to marry.

The case will decide a challenge to California's gay marriage ban that was approved by voters in 2008, and the ruling will likely be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. How the high court rules in the case could set the precedent for whether gay marriage becomes legal nationwide.

"This could be our Brown vs. Board of Education," said former Clinton White House adviser Richard Socarides, referring to the 1954 Supreme Court decision that outlawed racial segregation in schools and other public facilities. "Certainly the plaintiffs will tell you they are hoping for a broad ruling that says that any law that treats someone differently because of sexual orientation violates the U.S. Constitution."


click here for rest of article:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100107/...marriage_trial




Rick

[Daniel]

There are high stakes. And considering that both the NY and NJ legislatures voted down gay rights measures (I live in NYC), I wonder about the timing of this case. That said, I am aware that there is no right time in the advancement of civil rights.

What's interesting is that in both states (NY & NJ), the reason given for not instituting gay marriage was blamed on the economic climate. It is as if those voting had the crack-pot idea that just because times are hard there isn't enough to go around. Not enough marriage? Of course it doesn't make rational sense, but it does tell those of us who are fighting for our rights and many are thinking only of themselves.

If we win this case we win big.

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by Daniel

If we win this case we win big.

Yes. But what if we lose? Won't that be a huge setback for LGBT equality?


Rick

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by Rick336

Yes. But what if we lose? Won't that be a huge setback for LGBT equality?

You bet your Bippie! Win or lose, it's a big one. I don't want to think about the setback. Really. It would be awful. Can't see any silver lining, can you?

[Matt Algren]

Originally Posted by Rick336

Yes. But what if we lose? Won't that be a huge setback for LGBT equality?


Rick

I don't think so. I think we win either way, just like we won when Prop 8's passage became a wake up call for many, myself included. If anything, losing would get more straight people who think they're allies to become real allies and straight people who aren't allies to understand that these are real people, not caricatures from Sunday service.

Prop 8 changed the game. It wasn't a pre-emptive strike against the recognition of rights, it was the removal of already recognized rights. I don't know of any other case of recognized rights being stripped, let alone one that was considered constitutional.

[Matt Algren]

And I can tell you this: If the Supreme Court gets the case and decides that stripping us of rights is constitutional, enough people will arrive that night to protest in DC to make October look like a county fair.

[BenL]

Originally Posted by Rick336

Yes. But what if we lose? Won't that be a huge setback for LGBT equality?


Rick

I agree with Rick. Until recently, the main tactic in the gay marriage battle was to win in as many states as possible, then approach the Supreme Court and/or the Congress to spread the right to marry to the whole country. Now, if we lose in the Supreme Court, it could be a loooonnnng time before we get another shot at equal rights nationally.

This lawsuit certainly has two sharp edges to it.

[Daniel]

Have ruled (so I read in the NYTimes this morning) that trial proceedings will not be broadcast. Is is a harbinger of things to come from our nation's highest court?

The Supremes don't allow their own court proceedings to be broadcast. Is it about that? Or something else? And if it is, well....

[Matt Algren]

Originally Posted by Daniel

Have ruled (so I read in the NYTimes this morning) that trial proceedings will not be broadcast. Is is a harbinger of things to come from our nation's highest court?

The Supremes don't allow their own court proceedings to be broadcast. Is it about that? Or something else? And if it is, well....

The ruling was based on an administrative technicality and specifically didn't include the delayed youtube broadcasts, just the live broadcasts to other courthouses around the country. Judge Walker pulled the youtube plan on his own.