Federal appeals court rules Prop 8 unconstitutional

Opponents of Prop. 8 celebrate outside the courthouse after hearing that the court ruled the proposition unconstitutional.
Tony Zhou/Staff
Opponents of Prop. 8 celebrate outside the courthouse after hearing that the court ruled the proposition unconstitutional.

A federal appeals court ruled California’s 2008 voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional Tuesday, upholding an August 2010 decision.

“Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples,” the opinion, authored by Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt, reads.

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision claims Proposition 8 violates the 14th Amendment.

“This is a great thing — a long time coming,” said Andrew Albright, an ASUC senator and member of Sigma Epsilon Omega, a gay fraternity on campus. “I was in discussion section when I found out, and it took a lot to sit still and not freak out because I was so happy. I understand that this will probably go to the Supreme Court, but two federal courts have declared it unconstitutional, so this builds momentum.”

The Tuesday ruling comes after the measure was deemed unconstitutional in August 2010 by former Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, a decision that was brought to the 9th Circuit court following an appeal by Prop 8 sponsors.

“This is quite exciting — we’ve been working on this issue for many years,” said city Councilmember Kriss Worthington. “The polls show that a significant majority of young people support marriage equality, and as this generation grows older I think the percent in favor of marriage equality will keep rising – eventually, we’ll win.”

Shawn Lewis, president of the Berkeley College Republicans, said the club has no official position on Prop 8 since its members have diverse views on the matter.

“Since its passage in 2008, it was clear Prop 8 would go through a long legal battle in the courts system,” Lewis said. “Those on both sides of the debate should take strong note that not only is the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals the most overturned circuit in the nation, but also the particular judge who authored the ruling, Stephen Reinhardt, is the most overturned federal judge in the nation. This should indicate that the legal battle over Prop 8 is far from over.”

Analysts predict that backers of the proposition are likely to appeal the proposition to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“It’s a lot to presume that the Supreme Court will declare gay marriage constitutional throughout the U.S., but they might at least overturn Prop 8,” Albright said. “Reading through this decision and through Vaughn Walker’s decision, honestly, it’s as if they’re writing to Supreme Court justices using arguments that could further be used in a Supreme Court case.”

The opinion addresses the fact that Prop 8 was voter-approved, saying that there must be adequate reason for a law that treats various peoples differently.

“Although the Constitution permits communities to enact most laws they believe to be desirable, it requires that there be at least a legitimate reason for the passage of a law that treats different classes of people differently,” the opinion reads. “There was no such reason that Proposition 8 could have been enacted.”

Gov. Jerry Brown released a statement on the ruling later in the day Tuesday.

“The court has rendered a powerful affirmation of the right of same-sex couples to marry,” he said in the statement. “I applaud the wisdom and courage of this decision.”

Please keep our community civil. Comments should remain on topic and be respectful.
Read our full comment policy
  • It’s All Politics

    Everyone should have the same rights under the law.  Calling a same sex partnership/union is a “marriage” is not a right.  Same sex unions need their own word.

    • Adsahjh

       This proves it’s not a question of rights. It’s about forcing the society to celebrate their relations, rather than merely accept them.

    • M.

      I assume that for most people, when the word “marriage” is spoken, that they do not immediately think of what the law defines as marriage.  Instead, they think of two people who love each other being in a committed relationship.  The essence and spirit of the word is far more significant than what the technical definition is.  Not allowing their union to classify as a “marriage” is to imply that their relationship is somehow of lesser worth.  Although it isn’t a perfect analogy, it would be like saying that adopted children shouldn’t call their parents “mom” and “dad” just because they aren’t their biological children.  Just as with marriage, the words mother and father convey a sentiment far deeper than a definition.
      I agree that everyone should have the same rights under the law, but to forbid them from calling their marriage a union is callous and unjust.  

  • Adsahjh

    I’m going to LOL when the Supreme Court overturns this joke of a decision.

  • T.A.

     Let people do what they wanna do, if you’re strong in what you believe in, other’s actions shouldn’t phase you (those against gay marriage)…

  • Abc

     Keep everyone equal, everyone’s legal marriage is called a “legal marriage”, and if you want a “Christian marriage”, go get that at the church – you just don’t get to file jointly for your taxes if you don’t opt for the legal marriage.  It’s so simple, no idea why it’s made to be so complicated.

  • Current student

    how can the constitution be unconstitutional?

    this ruling is laughably idiotic.

    • Also a current student

      Civil rights issues should not be up for a vote by citizens. What if Black rights were taken to a vote in the 1960′s in the South? 

      • Guest

        and yet I bet you think it’s perfectly acceptable for obama to trash the Catholic Church’s freedom of religion just because he won an election…..

      • Abc

         Perfect analogy. 

        Relevant – http://i.imgur.com/0U2VN.png

    • Guest

       State constitution < US constitution.

  • Adsahjh

    Reinhardt and Hawkins are far-lefties. This won’t stand once it goes to the Supremes.

    • Guest

       Haha if the supreme court rules that it is constitutional to discriminate against gays then our constitution is fucked up. XD

      • Adsahjh