By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Private Policy and Terms of Use.
The bulk of Ken Starr's argument in favor of invalidating the 18,000 same-sex marriages that took place in the state of California before Prop. 8 was passed seems to hinge on one thought. Though the people may make stupid decisions, they "have the raw power to do it."
The bulk of Ken Starr's argument in favor of invalidating the 18,000 same-sex marriages that took place in the state of California before Prop. 8 was passed seems to hinge on one thought. Though the people may make stupid decisions, they "have the raw power to do it."
Case in point: Chief Justice Ronald George counters with a hypothetical. The voters decide to do away with free speech from the First Amendment. Is that an amendment or a revision, and do the people have the right to do it?
After much banter back and forth, Starr says they do.
When the justices counter and ask Starr if his argument would be the same had Prop. 8 stripped gays and lesbians of all the rights they enjoy under California law, he assures the justices the proposition did not -- but says that his argument would indeed be the same.
