Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

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.

News

Watching the Supreme Court Take on Prop 8

This story is free to read because readers choose to support LAist. If you find value in independent local reporting, make a donation to power our newsroom today.

Whether you watched at home, in your office or in public like at West Hollywood's Auditorium, this morning's Prop 8 state Supreme Court hearing was a long three hours as lawyers from both side were hammered with questions from the seven justices.

Raymond C. Marshall of the Asian Pacific American Legal Center was one of the first to speak to the justices. "This is the first time a ballot initiative will have been used to take away a fundamental right from a suspect class," he said.

Later, Kenneth Starr from Pepperdine University (Alumni = not happy) took the stand. "One of the inalienable rights articulated in the [California] Constitution is control over the Constitution," he said defending Prop 8's legality when held up against the light of it denying fundamental right to gay citizens. It's not up to the government to dictate the constitution, he said. "Governors change, legislatures change, but the enduring structure is there to protect liberty."

When it came to the 18,000 couples who legally married between June--when this very same court said gay marriage was legal--and November, Justice Carol Corrigan seemed to be against nullifying them. "If Californians can't rely on what this court says ... who should they ask?"

The court has up to 90 days to come out with a decision.

You come to LAist because you want independent reporting and trustworthy local information. Our newsroom doesn’t answer to shareholders looking to turn a profit. Instead, we answer to you and our connected community. We are free to tell the full truth, to hold power to account without fear or favor, and to follow facts wherever they lead. Our only loyalty is to our audiences and our mission: to inform, engage, and strengthen our community.

Right now, LAist has lost $1.7M in annual funding due to Congress clawing back money already approved. The support we receive from readers like you will determine how fully our newsroom can continue informing, serving, and strengthening Southern California.

If this story helped you today, please become a monthly member today to help sustain this mission. It just takes 1 minute to donate below.

Your tax-deductible donation keeps LAist independent and accessible to everyone.
Senior Vice President News, Editor in Chief

Make your tax-deductible donation today