UPDATE on Prop H8!

The California Supreme Court will hear Proposition 8 challenge, but denies request to postpone its implementation. Photo by Justin Gonzaga.

Prop. 8 suits win supreme court review

The California Supreme Court agreed yesterday to hear lawsuits challenging Proposition 8 but denied a request to postpone its implementation until the lawsuits are resolved.

Several lawsuits have been filed seeking to invalidate the proposition — which amended the state constitution to prohibit same-sex marriages — on the grounds that it makes such significant changes that it is a constitutional revision, which would need legislative approval.

On Tuesday, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to join an anti-Proposition 8 lawsuit initiated by San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera. Oakland's City Council did the same yesterday, and the city of Berkeley is likely to join in the coming weeks.

"The question before the court is, should the democratic process be allowed to enact this discrimination by a simple show of hands, or is a more deliberative legislative process required?" said Goodwin Liu, a UC Berkeley professor of law.

He said that the lawsuit faces tough legal precedents when it comes to overturning ballot measures but that the great public interest and the civil rights aspect of the issue may make these lawsuits unique.

"It does come as a relief that things can move forward, and there's still hope that it can be overturned before 2010," said Carlo de la Cruz, the ASUC's academic affairs vice president.

A release from the Campaign for Children and Families stated that the state Supreme Court would risk a voter revolt if it ruled against the proposition, which received 52.5 percent of the vote. They also argued that the proposition only affects a single part of the constitution and could not possibly be considered a revision.

In contrast with the state as a whole, the proposition garnered support from only 38 percent of voters in Alameda County. The board of supervisors voted to support the lawsuit in a closed session and made the announcement at their public meeting later that day.

"It's a civil rights issue," said supervisor Gail Steele. "What is that when people are taking rights away from others?"

In Berkeley, Councilmembers Kriss Worthington and Darryl Moore, who are gay, have brought the issue to the city attorney's office to determine whether a vote is required to support the lawsuit. The city has already adopted a policy of supporting marriage equality, so a vote may not be necessary, but if it is, many expect that the vote will be unanimous.

"It would be reflective of the vast majority of our constituents that we oppose the elimination of civil rights in our constitution," said Councilmember Max Anderson.

Phillip Alvarado, the campus campaign manager for the Get Up, Vote Down 4 & 8 campaign, said that if civil rights issues such as segregation and suffrage had to be passed through a vote, they would never have happened.

"Bigoted and homophobic people cannot rule what happens in someone else's life," he said. "The justices will, in the end, uphold equality and fairness."

James Parker reports for The Daily Californian, a student publication at UC Berkeley. The Daily Californian is partnering with Campus Politico for the 2008 elections.