[courtesy of Blog for America]

The California Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional for the state to deny same sex couples the right to marry.  So, starting this month, gay and lesbian couples all over California will have the ability to marry.  However, a ballot initiative has qualified for the November election that, if passed, would amend California's Constitution to ban marriage equality for good.  The Washington Post takes a look at the potential legal ramifications and confusion that could ensue if this ballot measure were to pass:

On Monday, a ballot measure allowing voters to define marriage as a union "between a man and a woman" was certified for the Nov. 4 election. Two days later, the California Supreme Court refused to rehear the same-sex marriage case or delay its decision legalizing such marriages, effective June 16.

The developments -- victories for both sides of the debate -- have engendered questions, most notably this: If California voters ban same-sex marriage in November, what happens to the thousands of couples expected to wed between the middle of this month and then?

It's a question no one can answer, say legal experts, who can only make predictions as California barrels down this untraveled legal path.

Danny
Communications Director

[courtesy of The California Majority Report]

If you’re going to pull a fast one, a used car lot is probably the place to do it.
 
So there’s a sort of poetic justice in the fact that Senator George Runner has chosen to spend Friday afternoon at a Lancaster car dealership. It’s the latest stop in the Republicans’ media tour urging legislators to "stop pork barrel spending" and "stop treating the taxpayers like an A.T.M."
 
Runner wants to stop pork-barrel spending all right -- he wants to stop the barrel at his front door and have himself a party.
 
You see, while Runner is railing against out of control spending, he’s is also simultaneously sponsoring a ballot initiative the Legislative Analyst estimates will cost us taxpayers $952 million a year -- all for programs that he’s picked out.
 
Among them? Millions of dollars every year for television and radio ads touting Runner’s own last ballot initiative. And like his last effort, Runner’s new billion-dollar boondoggle doesn’t contain dollar one to cover its costs.
 
Give Runner credit for this much: he’s not treating taxpayers like an A.T.M.

He’s playing them for suckers instead.
 
Let the buyer beware.

by Brian Leubitz [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

For the first time in the poll's history, the Field Poll reveals that gay marriage is favored by a majority of Californians: 51-42. On the ballot initiative, it seems to be going down at a 43%-51% clip. The full poll should be out tomorrow morning.

by Killer of Sacred Cows [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

In an analysis published today on both Metnews.com and the Log Cabin Republicans blog, Kevin Norte wrote a scathing analysis of the legal issues behind the anti-equality initiative which is currently working its way through validation proceedings and aimed at the California ballot in November. Norte has been a research attorney for the Los Angeles Superior Court since 1991.

According to Norte's analysis, the initiative cannot legally proceed to the ballot because it constitutes a revision, not just an amendment, of the California Constitution.

If this is the case, then the GLBT people of California have nothing to fear from this ballot initiative. It's already dead in the water. It's a moot point. Even if it was passed, it could not be enforced. It's already as archaic as the anti-sodomy, anti-miscegnation and Jim Crow laws are.

More after the jump...

by BruinKid [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

So one of the arguments I've been seeing against gay marriage is that the 2000 ballot initiative Prop. 22 showed what the "will of the people" is.  Except... a closer look at what happened back then makes it more ambiguous as to what will actually happen this November.

First, yes, Prop. 22 passed, 61.4%-38.6%.  But it wasn't on the ballot in November 2000, but rather in March 2000, in the primary election.  Now, here's the thing.  By then, Al Gore had already clinched the nomination against Bill Bradley, so there wasn't really an impetus for Democrats to go vote (much like you're seeing the GOP say now for McCain).  Meanwhile, the race between Bush and McCain was still going on, though winding down.

by Brian Leubitz [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

This is cross-posted from the California Majority Report. It was written by Richard Stapler, the press secretary for Speaker of the Assembly.

Today, the California State Supreme Court ruled in favor of marriage equality, allowing (in 30 days time) same sex couples to wed.

It's a joyous occassion for my partner (soon to be my husband!) and myself -- and the millions of LGBT Californians who will be shortly be afforded all the rights and responsibilities of marriage.

I heard the news on the Assembly floor this morning from a newspaper reporter -- and fought back tears of joy. I read with glee the opening statement of the court's action to the Speaker of the Assembly and several Members, halting with the overwhelming emotion I felt. Text messages and calls to my partner, friends and family ensued.

But there is a sobering reality to all of this. We've won this battle, but the war for our equal rights stretches on until November.  

[courtesy of The California Majority Report]

After learning that the November ballot will more than likely include a Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, I was inspired to offer some personal, rather than just purely political, commentary on the issue. Of course I'm a proponent of gay marriage and vehemently oppose this possible ballot initiative, but simply saying "I support this" and "I oppose that" is not good enough. I'm a 22 year old, politically-inclined, gay Democrat working in the California Legislature. Shouldn't I have something fresh, personal, and touching to say about this issue? Well, here is my attempt:<> <>I think I am part of a new era for LGBT folks. I have tons of gay and lesbian friends that experienced their teenage years in the 1970's, 80's, and 90's, and I think their experiences were significantly different than mine. The new millennium marked the beginning of high school for me as well as the beginning of my "coming out" process. However, it more importantly marked the beginning of an era where young gays and lesbians could grow up in an environment where their sexuality was not only accepted, but failed to be the sole factor by which other's judged them. There's more...