|Videos||News Feed||Syndicate the Show||About|
Excerpts from the judge's ruling overturning Prop. 8
LA Times • Aug 5, 2010
Proposition 8 cannot withstand any level of scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause, as excluding same-sex couples from marriage is simply not rationally related to a legitimate state interest.
Rather, the evidence shows that Proposition 8 harms the state's interest in equality, because it mandates that men and women be treated differently based only on antiquated and discredited notions of gender.
Moreover, the state cannot have an interest in disadvantaging an unpopular minority group simply because the group is unpopular.
A private moral view that same-sex couples are inferior to opposite-sex couples is not proper basis for legislation.
Here, the purported state interests fit so poorly with Proposition 8 that they are irrational. ... What is left is evidence that Proposition 8 enacts a moral view that there is something "wrong" with same-sex couples.
The evidence at trial ... uncloaks the most likely explanation for its passage: a desire to advance the belief that opposite-sex couples are morally superior to same-sex couples.
Moral disapproval alone is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians.
Keep in Touch