prop8liveblog
-
@ Guess? 4-3 upholding prop 8 in general, 4-3 leaving marriages intact, the latter 4-3 as per "In Re Marriage", Kennard the swing.
12:40 PM Mar 5th
from web
in reply to jvadnais
-
@ It's really timed. The time limits were published in advance, that was all entirely above board.
12:23 PM Mar 5th
from web
in reply to Josh_A
-
MLP: I'm going to go see Watchmen. More commentary later on my blog,
12:15 PM Mar 5th
from web
-
JD: Phew! Is right! Definitely time for lunch!
12:15 PM Mar 5th
from web
-
MLP: Phew. What a fascinating three hours. Thanks to my co-commentator @ - we'll definitely do this again!
12:13 PM Mar 5th
from web
-
JD: Thanks, everyone!
12:13 PM Mar 5th
from TwitBin
-
JD to MLP: Thansks, I'm glad you were able to join me!
12:13 PM Mar 5th
from TwitBin
-
@ MLP: Fair enough, but the Court can overturn P8 as unconstitutional prima facie. Happened in Colorado.
12:12 PM Mar 5th
from web
-
JD: And that's a wrap.
12:12 PM Mar 5th
from TwitBin
-
MLP: Many inalienable rights are civil, but in the case of privacy and therefore marriage, LGBT have been denied these inalienable rights.
12:10 PM Mar 5th
from web
-
@ (JD) Agreed, and those marriages ARE important to me. I just believe that it's critical to society we win both battles.
12:10 PM Mar 5th
from web
in reply to lizatblackrose
-
MLP: Kennard is confusing civil rights (right to amend) with inalienable rights. Someone needs to say this.
12:09 PM Mar 5th
from web
-
MLP: Len Sassaman: "Inalienable rights are natural rights. They are the rights of a person. A civil right is a right granted by statute."
12:08 PM Mar 5th
from web
-
JD: MLP: Agreed. Pity, since she is probably the swing vote we need.
12:08 PM Mar 5th
from TwitBin
-
MLP: Article 1, Section 1 lists inalienable rights -- liberty, privacy, &c. I don't think the right to amend is in there.
12:07 PM Mar 5th
from web
-
MLP: However -- is the people's right to amend listed as inalienable in the the CA Constitution? I think Kennard's on crack here.
12:07 PM Mar 5th
from web
-
MLP: This is like an irresistible force vs. immovable object argument - inalienable right of ppl to amend vs inalienable right to liberty.
12:06 PM Mar 5th
from web
-
JD: MLP: Nope, I was assuming therefore prob. wrong. :)
12:06 PM Mar 5th
from TwitBin
-
@ The Court seems a little unwilling to consider that possibility. Not quite sure why.
12:05 PM Mar 5th
from web
-
MLP: JD - did they say Krueger would be up? I didn't hear his name, might have misheard though.
12:03 PM Mar 5th
from web
|
- Name Joe
- Location San Jose, CA
- Web http://en.wikiped...
- Bio Live blog of the Prop 8 oral arguments before the CA Supreme Court. I am not a lawyer.
|
