S/O Calif. Supreme Court to take up gay marriage ban

Re: S/O Calif. Supreme Court to take up gay marriage ban

• TefLepOM

  November 2008

  I am not a lawyer, but in Maryland we had a ballot measure taken before the court (before voting) by a group that fought to get the wording to illustrate what the bill really was.  It was our measure on ballots and how it would fund education (noone wanted to say that it is in our Constitution that we HAVE to fund education).  So, maybe that is how it works in CA---it has to be challenged ahead of time?

  

  Report0 Reply
• EastSideFluffy

  November 2008

  That is an excellent question.  I think the No people didn't think it would pass so they didn't bother challenging it.  Or, there's some weird loop hole in the CA law that only lets you make this kind of challenge after the fact.  Or, people were just asleep at the wheel.

   

  Report0 Reply
• LittleMissWifey

  November 2008

  I don't think the courts should weigh in on policy measures (whether they go through the legislature or the voters) before said measures are actually enacted. I do think we need to rethink our whole prop. industry in CA though. A measure that goes through the legislature is vetted by at least 4 policy and fiscal committees in two houses and is reviewed by 120 members and 1 governor before it becomes law. Whereas a prop. maybe gets 5 minutes worth of attention by Cletus before he votes on it.
  

  Report0 Reply
• meshaliu

  November 2008

  I thought I'd read somewhere that the No people did take it to court and the court dismissed it saying they could bring it back if it passed?

  Also, a guy on Daily Show was saying that there are two kinds of props in CA, a revision and an adendem. A revision requires state congressional approval and an adendem does not. But there's no system currently in place to determine what kind of change you're working with.

  But I agree with LMW. A majority vote to ammend the constitution is lame.

  Team Basement Cat Knitting&Kitties

  Report0 Reply