Proposition 8

I was right, as were most observers, when we said the California Supreme Court would uphold Proposition 8 while allowing the same-sex marriages performed prior to last year's election to remain valid.

It was a middle ground, but it was the only decision the court could make. A court cannot overturn a constitutional amendment; courts interpret constitutions.

The decision was 6-1.

Details:

The 6-1 decision was issued by the same court that declared a year ago that a state law defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman violated the right to choose one's spouse and discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation.

Prop. 8 undid that ruling. The author of last year's 4-3 decision, Chief Justice Ronald George, said today that the voters were within their rights to approve a constitutional amendment redefining marriage to include only male-female couples.

Justice Carlos Moreno, in a lone dissent, said a majority should not be allowed to deprive a minority of fundamental rights by passing an initiative.

The justices ruled unanimously that Prop. 8 was not retroactive and that gay and lesbian couples who relied on the court's May 2008 ruling to get married before the Nov. 4 election will remain legally wed.

Prop 8 opponents will try and overturn it by initiative, but I have a feeling that despite a recent poll showing an almost even split, such an initiative will fail. Why? Primarily because of the way the opponents conducted themselves following last year's election.

In a truly bizarro development, a federal lawsuit has been filed over this ruling, and the two lead attorneys, David Boies, and our friend, Ted Olson, are on the same side.