SAN FRANCISCO — Supporters of gay marriage had just hired two famous lawyers to challenge Proposition 8 in federal court. Now they needed plaintiffs.
Secrecy was paramount. A lawsuit to overturn the ban on same-sex marriage was still pending in the California Supreme Court, and no one wanted to jeopardize that case.
From picking the plaintiffs to choosing the court where the federal suit would be filed, the strategists calculated each move on their drive to the Supreme Court. A series of decisions, both small and monumental, some well known and some obscure, shaped the course of the legal battle now bound for the history books.
Chad Griffin, the gay political strategist behind the federal challenge, was in charge of finding plaintiffs to be its public face. The lawyers wanted committed couples, eager to marry and willing to attend countless court hearings and put their private lives on display.
Ten were interviewed, and two were chosen: a gay male couple from Burbank and a lesbian couple from Berkeley.
Los Angeles was to be the venue for the suit. Most of the legal team lived there. But another federal lawsuit over gay marriage was languishing in Orange County, and the lawyers, concerned that the two suits might be consolidated, wanted complete control. They decided instead to file in San Francisco.
The federal suit was filed late on a Friday before the 2009 Memorial Day weekend. No one noticed. A few days later, the California Supreme Court ruled 6 to 1 that Proposition 8 was a valid state constitutional amendment.
Andy Pugno, chief counsel for the sponsors of Proposition 8, was stunned when he found out about the federal suit. He knew gay rights lawyers had opposed bringing one — fearing a major setback in the U.S. Supreme Court.
"It meant we had no time to celebrate our victory in the California Supreme Court," Pugno said. "We had to start defending against another challenge."
::
Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker was selected to hear the case in San Francisco. He was known as a conservative with a strong libertarian streak.
Theodore Boutrous Jr., a key lawyer on the legal team opposing Proposition 8, said some of the lawyers had appeared before Walker in the past. They considered him bold and iconoclastic, and they knew he was gay.
Pugno said his side knew little about the judge except that he was a Republican appointee.
The challengers hired the opposing counsel from Bush vs. Gore: Theodore Olson, known for his conservative political views, and David Boies, known for his liberal politics.
ProtectMarriage, the sponsors of Proposition 8, hired Charles Cooper, a highly regarded Supreme Court advocate.
Walker surprised both sides.
Instead of simply deciding constitutional questions, he wanted a trial to examine the evidence on whether same-sex marriage should be banned. Higher courts would have the final say on the legal questions, but as a trial judge he could make factual findings, he said.
The case started ominously for the challengers. The Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 that the trial could not be broadcast.
That vote, along ideological lines, worried supporters of gay marriage. "You really don't like to get a 5-4 smackdown at a trial in a case where you are thinking of going to the Supreme Court," Boutrous said.
For ProtectMarriage, the ruling "gave us hope," Pugno said.
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
Proposition 8's long and winding road to legal defeat
Dengan url
http://sehatgembiralami.blogspot.com/2013/07/proposition-8s-long-and-winding-road-to.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
Proposition 8's long and winding road to legal defeat
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
Proposition 8's long and winding road to legal defeat
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar