Continental promo
||  News  ||
 
08/09/08-08/11/08

Current Prop. 8 Description to Stay

Current Prop. 8 Description to Stay

Proposition 8 supporters got a setback on Friday when a Sacramento judge ruled that the proposed constitutional amendment will appear on the November ballot in words that could level the playing field in favor of gays. And it all turned on a word.

At issue was the legal language known as Title and Summary -- the headline and short explanation prepared by the state attorney general and printed on the ballot. As submitted by California attorney general Jerry Brown, the title of Prop. 8 is "Eliminates the Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry." Now it will stay that way, and in turn it will provide the best test yet of whether voters are really willing to see LGBT citizens deprived of their rights.

In a petition filed on July 29, Prop. 8 proponent Mark A. Larsson protested that Brown’s description is “extremely argumentative” and could prejudice voters against the measure. The remedy: Brown should be compelled to restore the same language that garnered 1.2 million signatures to put the original 2007 petition on the ballot, starting with "Limit on Marriage. Constitutional Amendment."

But thanks to the California supreme court’s ruling in favor of same-sex marriage, that ship has sailed, as superior court judge Timothy M. Frawley affirmed in rejecting Larsson’s suit.

Shannon Minter of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, who was present in the Sacramento courtroom, said that to keep the "Limit on Marriage" title would have been “extremely misleading” in the wake of the landmark decision. “The prior Title and Summary said the measure would have no effect on existing law and have no fiscal impact. And both of those things are untrue.”

Since the right to same-sex marriage now exists in law and has already been exercised by thousands of same-sex couples, the court reasoned, Prop. 8 would not simply limit marriage -- it would in fact eliminate an existing legal right.

Now, if they vote for the measure, voters will fully understand that they are voting to take away rights from their fellow citizens. This could in turn force proponents of Prop. 8 and other such initiatives out of their preferred guise as defenders of tradition and recast them as bigots.

Far from standing on significant legal grounds, Larsson’s challenge actually rested largely on Brown’s grammar, saying that the attorney general showed prejudice by “selecting a ballot title that begins with a negative, transitive active verb.”

This led to a series of rebuttals that lifted the court documents to the level of entertainment. “There is nothing inherently argumentative or prejudicial about transitive verbs, and the Court is not willing to fashion a rule that would require the Attorney General to engage in useless nominalization,” wrote Frawley in his decision.

Spokesman Gareth Lacy declined to comment on how the attorney general actually arrived at the Title and Summary language, citing office policy not to elaborate on Brown’s defense as set forth in the court documents. “We defended the Title and Summary strongly, and the court agreed,” said Lacy.

But are Prop. 8’s proponents getting a fair shake? Even if eliminates were a loaded word, is the attorney general required to choose something more neutral? No, wrote Judge Frawley, saying that “as a general rule, the title and summary prepared by the Attorney General are presumed accurate” and that legal standards “require substantial deference to the Attorney General's actions.”

While Brown has been guarded in discussing issues surrounding Prop. 8, few would take him for a friend of the measure. He has already predicted that if passed, Prop. 8 would not retroactively invalidate marriages performed since June 17 -- a worry for many same-sex couples.

But Brown’s most dramatic role could be yet to come.

“If Prop. 8 passed, which it won’t,” said Minter, “we very likely would challenge it. And in that case, the attorney general ordinarily would defend the measure -- although the attorney general always does have the option of agreeing that a measure is invalid. It hasn’t happened very often, but it has happened at least a couple of times before.” (Anne Stockwell, The Advocate)

Keywords:  California marriage 

Reader Comments

These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.

  • Name: Todd
    Date posted: 2008-11-17 2:34 PM
    Hometown: San Fransisco

    Comment:

    4 years ago the majority of people voted against gay marriage and our votes were IGNORED. The gay community persists on getting their "right" to marry, which is absurd and disgusting. This year our votes are about to be ignored yet again... Fact: Gay marriage enables gays the rights to familes.... fact: a gay family cannot raise their kids in the correct manner that a normal family could. Kids need a male and female role model in their lives. Gays think it can be positive, it isn't


  • Name: D. Roling Kearney
    Date posted: 2008-08-17 12:37 AM
    Hometown: Sacto, CA

    Comment:

    Well, if the truth REALLY be told, the title should read: "Eliminates the Right of Activist Judges to Allow Same-Sex Couples to Marry, Against the Voice of the People." Jus' sayin'.


  • Name: Tom Kidd
    Date posted: 2008-08-11 3:06 AM
    Hometown: Decatur, Illinois

    Comment:

    Good! For once, the Fascist Religious Right does not get their cake and eat it, too.


  • Name: Bartholemieux Andrews
    Date posted: 2008-08-08 5:31 PM
    Hometown: Salem, MA

    Comment:

    At least someone is FINALLY calling it what it is and describing exactly what it does.


  • Name: Robert
    Date posted: 2008-08-08 3:44 PM
    Hometown: Jacksoneville NC

    Comment:

    whats with the delay? its kind of obviouse that the change is clearer then the original, but the again I am bias and i simply dont want it to pass.


Back to top

Submit a comment for this story:

*Type your comment here (Required, 1000 characters max. HTML formatting and hyperlinks are NOT permitted.):

*Name (Required): 

*Hometown (Required): 

*E-mail address: (Required, but will not be displayed)

Is this comment for publication? 
Yes   No

Daytime phone number: (Required for print publication only and will not be displayed)

Please enter the words you see in the box, in order and separated by a space. Doing so helps prevent automated programs from abusing this service.

  

If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above. 

All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.

See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.

Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.

More Exclusives
  • View From the Hill: The End of DADT?
    Defense Secretary Robert Gates revealed that lawyers are exploring ways to ease enforcement of the military's gay ban, but cautioned that the law doesn't leave much wiggle room. He need look no further than DOD history for a lesson in altering the policy.
  • Hot Sheet: Week of July 5
    When you get back from that big 4th of July barbecue, unwind with Sacha Baron Cohen's Bruno and your favorite B-movie-mocking, basic cable robots.
  • Hungry Like the Wolf
    A master of viola, ukulele, piano, and harp, Patrick Wolf is a music prodigy -- one who, the night before this interview, spit on a cop and got himself arrested.
  • Soapside: Advocate's Guide to Daytime
    Forbes March talks about playing gay, Otalia fans outraged, update on One Life to Live’s Patricia Maurceri’s firing over gay plot point, Phillip Chancellor III big reveal, and Erica Kane goes to Africa.
  • The Faces of Federal Prop. 8
    With the federal challenge to Prop. 8 moving full speed ahead, Advocate.com sits down with the two couples named as plaintiffs in the suit.
  • Mommy, the Gays Are Coming
    After a year of advancements and celebration for gay and lesbian Colombians, the community takes to the streets of Bogota for the country's biggest pride ever.
  • The Pride of Antwerp
    Advocate.com hits the gay-friendly streets of Antwerp with openly gay police commissioner Serge Muyters.
  • Excerpt: Mean Little Deaf Queer
    In an excerpt from her humorous and harrowing new memoir, Mean Little Deaf Queer, Terry Galloway recalls her early childhood, describing feelings of ugliness, confusion about gender, and being one of the boys.
  • Top Political Blogs
    From Joe.My.God to The Daily Beast, Advocate.com spotlights a few of the best blogs that cover politics, inside and way outside the Beltway.
  • The Diva of French Television
    A hot young screenwriter who has made gay OK for millions of French viewers, Nicolas Mercier sips champagne, dons a feathered hat, and says he wants to see Colin Farrell and Jude Law go at it.