A federal appeals court last week extended a halt on same-sex marriages in California for the duration of Proposition 8’s appeals process, which will begin in December and could lead to a battle before the Supreme Court.
The Aug. 16 ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit was the latest in the legal war over the voter-approved initiative.
Same-sex couples around the state celebrated on Aug. 4 when Judge Vaughn Walker’s declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional and lifted the ban on same-sex marriage.
But wedding bells did not ring right away. Walker stayed his ruling to allow proponents of Proposition 8 time to file with the appeals court, meaning no new marriages could take place.
An appeal came swiftly, taking issue with Walker’s ruling that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional, in addition to other matters.
“We believe that (Walker) didn’t take into account expert witness testimony and that in fact many of his findings of fact are opinion, as opposed to findings of fact,” said Carla Hass, communications director for ProtectMarriage.com, a plaintiff in the case.
Proposition 8 proponents also filed an emergency appeal with the Ninth Circuit court for an extension of the stay, which would have expired Aug. 18 after Walker declined to extend it. Same-sex marriage could have resumed that day at 5 p.m., according to court documents.
The ruling on Aug. 16 by the appeals court prevented that.
“At that point I kind of expected it,” said fourth-year English student Armando Huipe, president of the Delta Lambda Phi fraternity for gay, bisexual and progressive men.
“It’s a political wheel turning ““ it didn’t catch me by surprise by any means.”
Legal briefs will be filed with the appeals court starting in September, and oral arguments will be heard in early December.
The appeals court’s decision to continue the freeze on same-sex marriage is not necessarily an indication of how the court will rule on the proposition’s constitutionality, said UCLA law Prof. Adam Winkler.
“I don’t think it’s a signal the court is hostile to same-sex marriage, I think it’s a signal the court is uncomfortable (allowing) people to get married only to have the rug pulled out from under them,” Winkler said.
The ruling more reflects lessons learned in 2008, Winkler said, when approximately 18,000 same-sex couples received marriage licenses in the year between the Supreme Court decision on the California law and the vote on Proposition 8.
When Proposition 8 passed, it put those marriages in legal limbo.
“You don’t want to let people get married, rely on that, build up expectations, make the financial plans they’re going to have to make, and then pull the rug out from under them,” Winkler said.
Peter Carley, a counselor in residence at the UCLA Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Campus Resource Center, went with his partner to San Diego in the summer of 2008 to get married when same-sex unions were legal.
Currently, his marriage is recognized in the state of California but not by the federal government, he said.
Carley was disappointed by the appeals court’s ruling but said he remains optimistic.
“The more we get out there and introduce our families to people, the more people realize that we’re not trying to take over the world, we’re trying to live our lives,” said Carley, who has two children.
Huipe said it is difficult watching the news for decisions affecting his personal life. But the celebration was not affected by the Monday ruling, he added.
“We all expected some sort of appeal but that didn’t keep us from celebrating one small victory,” Huipe said. “A battle like this one you just have to celebrate every victory no matter how small.”