"GOING TO THE CHAPEL".." ..gay marriages can resume starting Aug. 18"...

[Cha]

Last week, Federal Judge Vaughn Walker declared California's Proposition 8, banning marriage equality in the state, to be unconstitutional. Today, Walker said Prop 8 will no longer apply to California, as of Wednesday afternoon.

The federal judge who overturned California's same-sex marriage ban ruled Thursday that gay marriages can resume starting Aug. 18.

The decision by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker means gay and lesbian couples will have to wait six days before they can get married. That gives gay marriage opponents time to appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. If the appeals court fails to act by 5 p.m. local time next Wednesday, then gay marriages can go forward.

In his ruling, Walker concluded, "Because proponents make no argument that they -- as opposed to the state defendants or plaintiffs -- will be irreparably injured absent a stay, proponents have not given the court any basis to exercise its discretion to grant a stay."

That's obviously encouraging, but we don't yet know whether the 9th Circuit, generally considered the most progressive appeals court bench, will again stay the ruling, and keep the ban in place as the case continues through the appeals process.

I'm not an attorney -- those who know the procedural details here are encouraged to weigh in on this in the comments section -- but it's my understanding that today's announcement will, at a minimum, expedite the review of Walker's decision from last week.

"On a related note, FDL has an interesting item on the three judges most likely to hear the appeal at the 9th Circuit, and why there's ample reason to be optimistic that the three will uphold the underlying Walker ruling."

—Steve Benen 4:35 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (1)
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_08/025182.php#1812081

CHEERLEADING Again! YAY!~ :bounce::bounce::bounce:

[quiet.american]

1. Great news. Kudos to Judge Walker. Let the wedding bells ring! nt

[SeattleGirl]

2. This is great news, and I hope the stay remains lifted!

[FrenchieCat]

3. Excellent!

[Kind of Blue]

4. I can't tell you how happy I am about this.

It's as if the ruling was for me.

So many of my buddies I went to college with in the early '80s have died and never could they imagine this day would come.

I wish I had time to bake a cake but I've got a nice bottle of wine, hoping they're here in spirit to share it with me. :)

[Lindsey]

5. So awesome! n/t

[Hamlette]

6. the 9th Circuit extended the stay at least until that court rules on the appeal.

[Cha]

7. "MARRIAGE EQUALITY PUT ON HOLD IN CALIFORNIA"....

"Two weeks ago, Federal Judge Vaughn Walker declared California's Proposition 8, banning marriage equality in the state, to be unconstitutional. Last week, he lifted a stay, clearing the way for same-sex couples to legally wed as of tomorrow afternoon.

There was always the possibility that the 9th Circuit of Appeals, due to hear the case, would extend a stay as the case proceeds. Late yesterday, the appeals bench did just that.

California's ban on same-sex marriages will remain in place until at least December, an appeals court ruled Monday, dashing the hopes of hundreds of couples who had hoped to wed as soon as Wednesday. <...>

Supporters of the law appealed Walker's finding to the 9th Circuit, and the appeals court ruled Monday that Proposition 8 could remain in effect while it considers the case. It indicated that it will act relatively swiftly on the appeal, setting a hearing for early December -- a schedule that pleased those challenging the measure. But it will not come soon enough for the gay and lesbian couples who were already making plans to exchange vows at city halls around the state this week.

This will, no doubt, be deeply disappointing to couples whose rights are being denied. That said, yesterday's move shouldn't be interpreted as a hint about the eventual outcome -- issuing a stay doesn't mean the appeals bench will reverse the lower court's ruling on the case.

Indeed, the three-judge panel that extended the stay yesterday won't even be the same three-judge panel that will hear the appeal.

One more thing to keep an eye on here. Ben Smith notes that in its order, the 9th Circuit warned that "it's considering dismissing the appeal on the grounds that the appellants -- who don't include the Governor or Attorney General -- lack standing."

Yesterday's order said, "In addition to any issues appellants wish to raise on appeal, appellants are directed to include in their opening brief a discussion of why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of Article III standing."

Stay tuned."

—Steve Benen 8:00 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (13)
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_08/025235.php#1813610

It's being delayed but there's good reason for HOPE! :bounce:CHEERING FOR HOPE!:bounce: