Support for LAist comes from
We Explain L.A.
Stay Connected

Share This

This is an archival story that predates current editorial management.

This archival content was written, edited, and published prior to LAist's acquisition by its current owner, Southern California Public Radio ("SCPR"). Content, such as language choice and subject matter, in archival articles therefore may not align with SCPR's current editorial standards. To learn more about those standards and why we make this distinction, please click here.


Judge Orders Release of Confidential Prop 8 Campaign Docs, ACLU to Appeal Decision

Before you
Dear reader, we're asking you to help us keep local news available for all. Your financial support keeps our stories free to read, instead of hidden behind paywalls. We believe when reliable local reporting is widely available, the entire community benefits. Thank you for investing in your neighborhood.

Get ready to see some dirty laundry aired. On Monday Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker ordered gay marriage advocacy groups to turn over campaign materials from the election fight over Proposition 8, "a move that could prolong the legal challenge to California's ban on gay nuptials."

What does this mean? Well, this means that the ACLU and EQCA must turn over previously confidential campaign docs. They had objected but Walker got mad and stormed out of courtroom last week. He was probably mad because this may delay final arguments, previously expected to come in April, and his ruling. So now it's anyone's guess when that ruling will happen now.

The ACLU, though, is not pleased and plan on appealing Walker's former order. In part of a statement by ACLU of Northern California, staff attorney Elizabeth Gill said:

As we've seen by the passage of Prop 8, which stripped same sex couples of their Constitutional right to marry, LGBT people and their supporters are especially vulnerable in the initiative process. We need to be able to plan and strategize without being afraid that our emails and other communications will someday have to be turned over to our opponents…
Support for LAist comes from


It might make sense to force people to turn over emails to prove a violation of the constitution. But no one is claiming—or could claim—that what the No on 8 committees said or did violated the constitution. We believe the court is wrong on the law and intend to appeal the matter to the federal appeals court

However, as a one SFist commenter pointed out, if one side is going to ask for full disclosure from one side, the other side must be "ready to demonstrate that openness" as well.