Emergency Prop 8 Appeal Filed

[david13]

I guess this was filed this morning. An emergency? Weird way of looking at it. They think marriage will get all damaged? It will be all stretched out of shape? It won't fit anybody after that?
I hope I am correct in believing that the 9th Circuit will not act.
dc
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/08/prop-8-proponents-file-emergency-appeal-to-block-gay-marriage.html

[mzteris]

1. What is the "irreparable harm" being done to them? n/t

[Ruby the Liberal]

4. In a bizarre twist, I heard a talking head note that the "harm"

could be to the ones who get married in the offchance the ruling is overturned on appeal.

[kestrel91316]

6. Mighty paternalistic of them. Maybe if that's the case they should let

the poor gay people who are gonna be victims of such a cruel trick be the ones to file.

They lack standing. And neurons.

[BattyDem]

7. Then wouldn't they (the married couple) have to file the appeal?

If you're not the couple being married, then there is no chance of any harm to you if the ruling is overturned.


edited for clarity :-)

[Ruby the Liberal]

12. Thats what I would have thought, but the talking head interviewing the talking head who said it

didn't ask followup questions to explore it further.

It seemed rather weak to me though.

[Ruby the Liberal]

17. Update - that IS what they are using.

Just read on HuffPost:

The ban's backers "point to harm resulting from a 'cloud of uncertainty' surrounding the validity of marriages performed after judgment is entered but before proponents' appeal is resolved," he said. "Proponents have not, however, argued that any of them seek to wed a same-sex spouse."

SNIP

They argued the appeals court should grant a stay of Walker's order requiring state officials to cease enforcing Proposition 8 "to avoid the confusion and irreparable injury that would flow from the creation of a class of purported same-sex marriages."<-/div>

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/13/judge-walker-i-doubt-prop_n_681224.html

[Hawkeye-X]

25. Pure. Unadultered. Bullshit.

9th Circuit will deny, and USSC will deny, and it's over the Prop H8rs.

Hawkeye-X

[BattyDem]

29. The "confusion and irreparable injury" argument doesn't make sense because ...

there are already same-sex, married couples in California. How would more marriages change the current situation?

Don't these people have anything better to do with their time and energy? :eyes:

[LostinVA]

23. Yes, that's who would have to file it

[damntexdem]

8. A claim that Walker thoroughly rebutted, ...

and noted that they plaintiffs had no standing to even raise.

[Ruby the Liberal]

13. That legal opinion was SOOO well written, I would wonder if anyone even could win a reversal.

That was law school textbook perfect.

[SwampG8r]

33. i am not a lawyer

but i play one...
just kidding

when prop 8 went down i said then that the state could find a right it had not recognized previously but it could not "unfind"one once it was extended

was i right?

[EFerrari]

2. They pretty much had to try. nt

[uncommon]

3. "Emergency" in a legal sense just means a judge will look at it faster.

This was to be expected.

[Hawkeye-X]

26. It should be looked at immediately, then denied immediately

and tell them to no legal basis for any further appeals, and USSC is too busy to care.

Hawkeye-X

[BattyDem]

5. "The district court simply ignored virtually everything ..."

I thought they couldn't support their own claims during the trial. So what evidence did the judge ignore? :shrug:

[damntexdem]

9. And the court didn't ignore their arguments, ...

rather the judge totally rejected them.

[BattyDem]

10. Good point!

:-)

[lolly]

15. He ignored their feelings

Poor dears. And now they're sooo upset. Someone should make them feel better right now!

[SwampG8r]

34. virtually

weasel speak for "we got nothin"

[jgraz]

11. This should be fun.

Good luck establishing your standing to appeal, you fundie scumwads. :popcorn:

[KurtNYC]

14. Emergency -- monogamous gay people attacking useful stereotype

...send bigoted help at once...GOP fund raising at risk...emergency.

[Veruca Salt]

19. DUzy!

:rofl:

[ruggerson]

32. lol n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

16. Good luck proving that some harm will result.

Should be an interesting argument.

[Ruby the Liberal]

18. See #17 in the thread for link. The "harm" is to the gays who marry in the interim.

Unbelievable for them to use this as a reason. Apparently they are now protecting the gay community from itself.

[david13]

21. The problem is, to seek protection for a group,

YOU HAVE TO BE A PART OF OR A MEMBER OF THE GROUP.
The judge already said ... they isn't.
You also have to show a specific problem for 'emergency' relief.

How much more vague can you get than ... "a cloud". What is more vague than a cloud?

Ah, the insanity.

Fortunately the judge showed some true sanity, rare in this country these days.
dc

[Ruby the Liberal]

27. Dunno - I'm not a lawyer. Am familiar with standing, and apparently they think they have a shot.

Personally, I _want_ this to escalate to SCOTUS. The opinion was brilliantly written as if it was a personal note to (swing vote) Justice Kennedy.

Then it will be over and done with as opposed to 45 more state-by-state dramas.

[alcibiades_mystery]

36. I believe this refers to proponents' standing to appeal the denial of a stay

The ruling itself IS going to the Appeals court, then likely to the SCOTUS. What they lack standing to appeal is the denial of a stay on the ruling (i.e., the vacating of Prop 8) pending appeal.

[Ruby the Liberal]

37. Ah - I misunderstood. Thanks!

[alcibiades_mystery]

35. What is more vague than a cloud?

:rofl:

:thumbsup:

[Manifestor_of_Light]

20. No harm shown = no standing to sue. Simple.

Yes, that opinion is a thing of beauty.


So let them get their panties in a wad, their knickers in a twist, as they would say in Merry Olde England.

They have NO STANDING to sue, or appeal.


Yes I am a lawyer but I do not play one on TV. :D


Judge Vaughn Walker, ---> :yourock:

[david13]

22. Oh, so you are a lawyer, huh? And do tell, what were you before

you were a lawyer?
Just a joke. An old lawyer joke.
dc

[Hawkeye-X]

24. 9th Circuit of Appeals will deny the emergency

and tell them to go take it to the Supreme Court, which will then deny any further emergency appeals.

[SnakeEyes]

28. I think SCOTUS is definitely going to get involved

This case is too big and the court continues to move conservative.

[Hawkeye-X]

30. Walker's opinion on the Prop 8 is nearly unreversable

There is no reversible error on his opinion on Prop 8. What's more, the anti-gay asswipes have zero standing to continue the appeal since the state declined to appeal.

If they want to use the same tired argument for the 9th Circuit of Appeals, the judge will laugh them out, sanction them 15 billion to the GLBT community, etc.

[SnakeEyes]

38. I'm not certain of that.

I've read arguments from legal analysts on all sides and I don't think anything is a guarantee or that this is an air tight ruling.

As far as standing, the 9th circuit has to agree that they have no standing. It gets interesting there. A theory exists from some analysts that if the 9th Circuit rules with Walker regarding standing then they may never have had standing in the first place which could/would throw out the entire case and ruling, forcing them to start over again. If they ruled they never had standing yet failed to throw out the ruling I see the SC stepping in.

[depakid]

31. These particular appellants probably lack federal standing

[SnakeEyes]

39. I guess not

They 9th circuit didn't deny.

[FreeState]

40. Well technically no - but they also hinted doubt they have standing to appeal n/t