Friday, August 13, 2010

Gay Marriage Interruptus



Federal judge Vaughn Walker announced that he would be ruling Thursday morning concerning lifting the stay on his Proposition 8 decision, possibly allowing for gay marriages to commence once again in California.



As it turned out, the decision wasn't announced until 12:30 PM, by which time there were dozens of couples lined up in front of the clerk's office at San Francisco City Hall. The announcement was that the stay had been lifted.



We ran into an aide to State Senator Mark Leno, above, who told us there was a big "however..." It seems that Walker issued another temporary stay of the ruling until Wednesday, August 18th at 5:00 PM, presumably to give the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals time to issue their own stay on the decision if so inclined.



There was a hastily called press conference by Assessor Phil Ting and City Administrator Edwin Lee above, who explained that a host of volunteers had been assembled for the clerk's office just in case they could start the marriage mill, but that there wouldn't be anything happening on that front until next Wednesday.



So the legal rollercoaster continues. For the latest in motions filed with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, click here for Brian Devine's lawyerly explanations at Calitics. The latest twist is that Proposition 8 supporters have until Monday at 9AM to file their appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court.

3 comments:

Matty Boy said...

You should tell Mark Leno's aide that if she's trying to do a Dr. Evil impression, she's supposed to use the little finger and not the index finger.

Are you and Tony considering a walk down the aisle?

sfmike said...

Dear Matty: If we do, it will definitely be an elopement, and only for Social Security, real estate and tax reasons. As somebody wrote on one of the political blogs, "On marriage, I'm an agnostic, but when it comes to being against discrimination, I'm a holy roller."

Matty Boy said...

My dad got married a few years back for largely the same reasons you state. He was in his seventies and has since turned eighty, his wife's a little younger, so the all important "procreation" reason for the sanctity of marriage was absolutely, positively not a factor.

There are no reasons I can see your rights should be different from his, and this from a guy on the high side of fifty who expects never to be married.

Best wishes as always.