Jerry Brown is My Hero
California Attorney General Jerry Brown did his job yesterday. Instead of attempting to defend Proposition 8, he filed a brief against it. Today you will hear a bunch of weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth from the religions folk that Jerry Brown isn't doing his job, but he is.
Jerry's job is not to defend unjust laws. Jerry's job is to uphold and protect the Constitution. That's what he and all public officials swear to do when they take the oath of office. If his office determines that a law is unconstitutional in its legal opinion, his duty is to argue against it. It is the duty of the Supreme Court to decide if he's right or wrong.
The "Protect Marriage" group, had already said they didn't trust Jerry to defend Proposition 8, so he didn't even try. They're going to press to have their modern-day version of Williams Jennings Bryan argue their case: the always-in-your-bedroom, Ken Starr. Luckily, in this case, unlike the Scopes Trial, he's not arguing in front of a Tennessee jury or supreme court, but the California Supreme Court who has already decided this exact case once. It was Jerry's reading of that decision "In RE: Marriage" that left him no other choice but to file that Prop 8 be invalidated.
That decision said that in order for the State to ban something, it must have a compelling reason to do so: that to honor tradition is not reason enough, that voters initiatives must meet the same Constitutional tests as all legislation, and that sexual orientation does not constitute a legitimate basis upon which to deny or withhold legal rights. Proposition 8, saying exactly what Proposition 22 did, only injecting it in a different location of the law, offers nothing new to the debate.
Each of the cases pending against Proposition 8 offers a different argument, but Jerry's argument goes right to the core issue. He comes right out and says Proposition 8 is itself unconstitutional, not that it was enacted unconstitutionally. His argument is not as radical as some not-so-unbiased legal "scholars" are saying. You cannot pass a constitutional amendment that goes against the core of the constitution. He's given the Supreme Court the argument needed to make Proposition 8 go away for good.
The "Protect Marriage" group will be hard pressed to demonstrate that they or society had or will be harmed by same-gender marriage, but we will easily be able to show how Proposition 8 tramples on our rights and destroys our constitutional guarantees of equal protection. It will be the same arguments put forth for Proposition 22, only this time, we have all three branches of government on our side already.
I've met Jerry Brown and I was impressed with the things he had to say and his decision here to fight Proposition 8 makes me like him even more. You can bet that the religion right will have their talking points aimed squarely at him this news cycle.
Jerry's job is not to defend unjust laws. Jerry's job is to uphold and protect the Constitution. That's what he and all public officials swear to do when they take the oath of office. If his office determines that a law is unconstitutional in its legal opinion, his duty is to argue against it. It is the duty of the Supreme Court to decide if he's right or wrong.
The "Protect Marriage" group, had already said they didn't trust Jerry to defend Proposition 8, so he didn't even try. They're going to press to have their modern-day version of Williams Jennings Bryan argue their case: the always-in-your-bedroom, Ken Starr. Luckily, in this case, unlike the Scopes Trial, he's not arguing in front of a Tennessee jury or supreme court, but the California Supreme Court who has already decided this exact case once. It was Jerry's reading of that decision "In RE: Marriage" that left him no other choice but to file that Prop 8 be invalidated.
That decision said that in order for the State to ban something, it must have a compelling reason to do so: that to honor tradition is not reason enough, that voters initiatives must meet the same Constitutional tests as all legislation, and that sexual orientation does not constitute a legitimate basis upon which to deny or withhold legal rights. Proposition 8, saying exactly what Proposition 22 did, only injecting it in a different location of the law, offers nothing new to the debate.
Each of the cases pending against Proposition 8 offers a different argument, but Jerry's argument goes right to the core issue. He comes right out and says Proposition 8 is itself unconstitutional, not that it was enacted unconstitutionally. His argument is not as radical as some not-so-unbiased legal "scholars" are saying. You cannot pass a constitutional amendment that goes against the core of the constitution. He's given the Supreme Court the argument needed to make Proposition 8 go away for good.
The "Protect Marriage" group will be hard pressed to demonstrate that they or society had or will be harmed by same-gender marriage, but we will easily be able to show how Proposition 8 tramples on our rights and destroys our constitutional guarantees of equal protection. It will be the same arguments put forth for Proposition 22, only this time, we have all three branches of government on our side already.
I've met Jerry Brown and I was impressed with the things he had to say and his decision here to fight Proposition 8 makes me like him even more. You can bet that the religion right will have their talking points aimed squarely at him this news cycle.