August 4th, 2010
07:40 AM ET
4 years ago

California gears up for ruling on same-sex marriage

 A federal judge in California is expected to issue his ruling Wednesday on whether the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.
A federal judge in California is expected to issue his ruling Wednesday on whether the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.

(CNN) – A federal judge in California is expected to issue his ruling Wednesday on whether the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.

The closely watched case, to be decided by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, comes some two years after Californians voted to pass Proposition 8, which defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

Wednesday's ruling, expected in the early afternoon, will decide whether that ban violates the U.S. Constitution by creating separate classes of people with different laws for each.

Full story


Filed under: California • Proposition 8
soundoff (18 Responses)
  1. Go USA!

    God Bless Kristin Perry and Sandy Stier, and Jeffrey Zarrillo and Paul Katami. God belives in love and commitment...it is man that has made the rules and defined marraige.

    Not to mention that this law is unconstitutional, creates a seperate class of citizen, and codifies discrimination into California law.

    That is why this law is immoral, unjust, and wrong, and must be overturned.

    August 4, 2010 08:15 am at 8:15 am |
  2. Liz the First

    If justice is truly done, this heinous law will be overturned. the state has no basis to discriminate against people based on sexual orientation. i would think that conservatives who are so vehemently opposed to government telling people what to do would wholeheartedly support people's right to marry the person they chose to. gays are perfectly free to marry now, just not free to marry the person they belong with. that is the ultimate government interference in people's lives. but being the monumental hypocrites they are, the conservatives don't support the freedom to do something they don't like. marriage laws should state that a civil marriage will consist of two persons over the age of consent and no closer related than third cousin. that would silence the mindless braying about gay marriage leading to people marrying their sister, their goat, or their toaster.

    August 4, 2010 08:48 am at 8:48 am |
  3. Eric, Walnut Creek, CA

    How many times do the people of California have to vote that they DON'T want gay marriage? They have voted 3 times on the measure, each tiime voting it down.

    Why do judges have the right to over rule the people?

    August 4, 2010 08:50 am at 8:50 am |
  4. JK Ashburn, VA

    It's California. There will no doubt be rioting in Oakland and Los Angeles if the ruling supports the ban. Shopkeepers in California cities - board up your windows now. Anarchy may set in.

    August 4, 2010 08:50 am at 8:50 am |
  5. Ron in california

    Will a judge thwart the will of the people? The gay marriage issue won't go away. No matter wht the ruling there will be apeal after appeal after appeal until it goes to the Supreme Court.

    August 4, 2010 09:12 am at 9:12 am |
  6. DENNA

    The Conservatives in this country have so much trouble to make they don't know where to start. Ban the Gays! Undo the Constitution! Make children born to undocumented workers illegal too! Oh, yeah, then they go to church and pray and think themselves oh so good. Yeah, right.

    August 4, 2010 09:17 am at 9:17 am |
  7. Can't we all just get along?

    Why is everyone up in arms about same-sex marriages? Don't they have the right to be as miserable as opposite sex married folks?

    August 4, 2010 09:19 am at 9:19 am |
  8. Mark Jeffery Koch

    Irregardless of where you stand on this issue the voters cannot decide to vote to deny other citizens their civil rights. Imagine this was the 1950's and 1960's and voters approved a ballot question about whether a State could continue separate eating facilities and restrooms for Black Americans and separate educational facilities for Blacks. That would terribly wrong.

    There is a reason why we have a legislature and judiciary in our States and Federal Governments. Rights of groups or individuals are not to be a matter for the ballot box and should be decided in the appropriate forum – by laws passed by our legislators and their constitutionality ruled on by our courts.

    August 4, 2010 09:23 am at 9:23 am |
  9. C Smith

    The only valid argument against gay marriage is religious based and that has no place in politics. Other than that it is just plain bigotry and hatred. I hope the judge rules against this.

    August 4, 2010 09:24 am at 9:24 am |
  10. phoenix86

    Most likely the California judge will overturn the voters and repeal Prop 8.

    The US has its own version of the Nuremburg Laws, where the political party and the courts ignore the voters and impose their ideology.

    August 4, 2010 09:44 am at 9:44 am |
  11. NVa Native

    Freedom of religion is only possible with freedom from religion – as the Founders wrote it.

    Civil unions by the state for everyone, marriage ceremonies by "your religion of choice" – if they accept it then so be it.

    August 4, 2010 09:47 am at 9:47 am |
  12. Robert NY

    Here's hoping that he overturns the ruling. Good luck!

    August 4, 2010 10:08 am at 10:08 am |
  13. jim

    You can't expect a judge in the state of California to give a ruling that is in line with mainstream America just like you would see voters in Nancy Pelosi's district tossing her out on the street.

    August 4, 2010 10:13 am at 10:13 am |
  14. Chessnutz of Liverpool NY

    Why is the Government in the people's bedrooms? It is a free country right? Two consenting adults who are in love, love folks what is wrong with love?

    August 4, 2010 10:17 am at 10:17 am |
  15. Only Logic

    D'uh. Of course the law is unconstitutional. It clearly discriminates against a specific class of persons and denies that group rights and privileges afforded to everyone else. This is an opena-and-shut ruling.

    August 4, 2010 10:27 am at 10:27 am |
  16. GOP = "I hope he fails"

    If the general public is allowed to decide whether gays are acceptable for marriage, I hope we don't stop there. I have a few other groups I'd find morally offensive and I would like to restrict their right to get married. I'll start with fundamentalist Christians. I find them sick and disgusting, and my personal moral code does not accept them as equal citizens. Therefore I should have the right to restrict them from getting married.

    August 4, 2010 10:36 am at 10:36 am |
  17. Chuck Anaheim, Ca

    This should be fun wtaching the heads explode on wichever side loses.

    August 4, 2010 10:42 am at 10:42 am |
  18. Oy Vey Az

    I'd say it's about time we had some same sex legislative reform.

    I've had the same old sex for the past thirty years ... and reform is definably what is required ... definitely !

    August 4, 2010 10:49 am at 10:49 am |