<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	<title>MetaFilter posts tagged with California and samesexmarriage</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/tags/California+samesexmarriage</link>
	<description>Posts tagged with 'California' and 'samesexmarriage' at MetaFilter.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2013 09:54:56 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2013 09:54:56 -0800</lastBuildDate>

	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<item>
		<title>SCOTUS Hears Oral Arguments in Prop 8 Case</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/126390/SCOTUS%2DHears%2DOral%2DArguments%2Din%2DProp%2D8%2DCase</link>
		<description> Earlier today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the California Prop 8 case, &lt;em&gt;Hollingsworth v. Perry&lt;/em&gt;.  SCOTUSblog has a round-up of their analysis of today&apos;s arguments &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/03/menu-of-todays-coverage-of-the-proposition-8-argument/&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.   &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/27/us/supreme-court-same-sex-marriage-case.html?hp&amp;_r=0&quot;&gt;NYT article&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-supreme-court-gay-marriage-ruling-20130326,0,1511924.story&quot;&gt;LA Times article.&lt;/a&gt; The full audio of today&apos;s arguments and an unofficial transcript are available on the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_audio_detail.aspx?argument=12-144&quot;&gt;Supreme Court website&lt;/a&gt;.

For background information on the case, see SCOTUSblog&apos;s &lt;em&gt;Perry&lt;/em&gt; page &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/hollingsworth-v-perry/?wpmp_switcher=desktop&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.metafilter.com/tags/proposition8&quot;&gt;Previously&lt;/a&gt;. </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2013:site.126390</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2013 09:54:56 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>california</category>
		<category>gaymarriage</category>
		<category>lgbt</category>
		<category>marriage</category>
		<category>marriageequality</category>
		<category>perry</category>
		<category>prop8</category>
		<category>proposition8</category>
		<category>samesexmarriage</category>
		<category>scotus</category>
		<category>scotusblog</category>
		<category>supremecourt</category>
		<dc:creator>insectosaurus</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>CA Supreme Court: Proponents have standing to defend Prop 8</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/109553/CA%2DSupreme%2DCourt%2DProponents%2Dhave%2Dstanding%2Dto%2Ddefend%2DProp%2D8</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/11/17/142462886/california-court-says-same-sex-marriage-opponents-may-defend-prop-8"&gt;This morning&lt;/a&gt; , the California Supreme Court announced that the proponents of Prop 8 have standing to defend it. 

The full decision is &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S189476.PDF&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; (.pdf). &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scotusblog.com/2011/11/ruling-due-on-prop-8&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt; is an outline of the issue.

From the decision:

As we shall explain, because the initiative process is specifically intended to enable the people to amend the state Constitution or to enact statutes when current government officials have declined to adopt (and often have publicly opposed) the measure in question, the voters who have successfully adopted an initiative measure may reasonably harbor a legitimate concern that the public officials who ordinarily defend a challenged state law in court may not, in the case of an initiative measure, always undertake such a defense with vigor or with the objectives and interests of those voters paramount in mind. As a consequence, California courts have routinely permitted the official proponents of an initiative to intervene or appear as real parties in interest to defend a challenged voter- approved initiative measure in order &#8213;to guard the people&#8216;s right to exercise initiative power . . . In this manner, the official proponents&#8216; general ability to appear and defend the state&#8216;s interest in the validity of the initiative measure and to appeal a lower court judgment invalidating the measure serves to enhance both the fairness of the judicial process and the appearance of fairness of that process. </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2011:site.109553</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2011 10:48:09 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>california</category>
		<category>gay</category>
		<category>gaymarriage</category>
		<category>prop8</category>
		<category>samesexmarriage</category>
		<dc:creator>insectosaurus</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>The numbers behind H8</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/94405/The%2Dnumbers%2Dbehind%2DH8</link>
		<description> With a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hOiMLmsztmiGlNvjNLQLw4N41h1QD9HCHBTG0&quot;&gt;ruling scheduled&lt;/a&gt; today on Prop 8 &#8212; the California ballot measure that took away the right to marry from same-sex couples &#8212; Dave Fleischer has an in-depth &lt;a href=&quot;http://prop8report.lgbtmentoring.org/&quot;&gt;analysis&lt;/a&gt; of all of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.eqca.org/site/pp.asp?c=kuLRJ9MRKrH&amp;b=6096765&quot;&gt;polling data&lt;/a&gt; on Prop 8, and his findings include some counter-intuitive numbers, like that the confusing wording actually ended up helping the No vote more than the Yes.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2010:site.94405</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Aug 2010 08:25:43 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>appeal</category>
		<category>california</category>
		<category>equality</category>
		<category>gay</category>
		<category>gaymarriage</category>
		<category>gayrights</category>
		<category>judge</category>
		<category>justice</category>
		<category>lesbian</category>
		<category>lgbt</category>
		<category>marriage</category>
		<category>policy</category>
		<category>polling</category>
		<category>prop</category>
		<category>prop8</category>
		<category>proposition8</category>
		<category>ruling</category>
		<category>samesexmarriage</category>
		<dc:creator>klangklangston</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Please don&apos;t divorce my papa and daddy.</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/77746/Please%2Ddont%2Ddivorce%2Dmy%2Dpapa%2Dand%2Ddaddy</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/couragecampaign/sets/72157611501972510/show/"&gt;Please don&apos;t divorce us.&lt;/a&gt; An emotional argument for overturning Prop 8.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2008:site.77746</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2008 19:44:54 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>california</category>
		<category>divorce</category>
		<category>gaymarriage</category>
		<category>love</category>
		<category>marriage</category>
		<category>prop8</category>
		<category>samesexmarriage</category>
		<dc:creator>desjardins</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>The states of marriage</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/75548/The%2Dstates%2Dof%2Dmarriage</link>
		<description> Just as a California campaign for a  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=14&amp;entry_id=31285&quot;&gt;Constitutional&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/06/MNHB1388I5.DTL&amp;hw=prop&amp;sn=010&amp;sc=272&quot;&gt;ban&lt;/a&gt; on &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/opinion/29mon3.html?ref=opinion&quot;&gt;same-sex marriage&lt;/a&gt; (allowed since &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/16/MNDB118S9N.DTL&quot;&gt;June 16, 2008&lt;/a&gt;) is heating up the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/articles/2008/10/10/conn_supreme_court_ruling_same_sex_marriage_case/&quot;&gt;Connecticut Supreme Court&lt;/a&gt; has followed suit and overturned bans on same-sex marriage in that state. They are the third state in the nation to do so, following California earlier this year and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/04/gay.marriage/index.html&quot;&gt;Massachusetts in 2004&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/02/nyregion/02samesex.html&quot;&gt;New York State&lt;/a&gt; does not perform, but does recognize as legally-valid, such marriages. </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2008:site.75548</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:13:46 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>california</category>
		<category>connecticut</category>
		<category>marriage</category>
		<category>massachusetts</category>
		<category>proposition8</category>
		<category>samesexmarriage</category>
		<category>statelaw</category>
		<dc:creator>liketitanic</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Goin&apos; to the chapel and we&apos;re / Gonna get ma-ha-harried!</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/71693/Goin%2Dto%2Dthe%2Dchapel%2Dand%2Dwere%2DGonna%2Dget%2Dmahaharried</link>
		<description> &lt;b&gt;NewsFilter:&lt;/b&gt; The California Supreme Court has just &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gaymarriage16-2008may16,1,4027698.story&quot;&gt;overturned the state&apos;s ban on same-sex marriages&lt;/a&gt;. Read the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147999.PDF&quot;&gt;decision&lt;/a&gt;.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2008:site.71693</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 10:41:00 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>california</category>
		<category>champagneforeverybody</category>
		<category>gay</category>
		<category>gaymarriage</category>
		<category>hooray</category>
		<category>law</category>
		<category>marriage</category>
		<category>mazeltov</category>
		<category>newsfilter</category>
		<category>samesexmarriage</category>
		<dc:creator>Faint of Butt</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/1036/</link>
		<description> &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.samesexmarriage.org/&quot;&gt;Get the petition.&lt;/a&gt; They need one million signatures before April 20 to get it back on the November ballot. If you&apos;re in California, print out the petition and start drumming up support today. It&apos;s not so often you get a second chance like this. Show the country that California does indeed, rock.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2000:site.1036</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Mar 2000 03:31:07 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>brokenlink</category>
		<category>California</category>
		<category>gay</category>
		<category>gaymarriage</category>
		<category>GLBT</category>
		<category>homosexuality</category>
		<category>marriage</category>
		<category>petition</category>
		<category>politics</category>
		<category>prop22</category>
		<category>proposition22</category>
		<category>rights</category>
		<category>samesexmarriage</category>
		<dc:creator>veruca</dc:creator>
	</item>
      
	</channel>
</rss>


