SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court plans to announce whether it thinks California's same-sex marriage ban violates the civil rights of gays and lesbians, and if the trial judge who struck down the voter-approved measure should have revealed he was in a long-term relationship with another man.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said a three-judge panel was ready to publish its long-awaited opinions Tuesday on the ban and on the possible conflict-of-interest by former Chief U.S. Judge Vaughn Walker, who ruled that Proposition 8 did not pass constitutional muster.
Walker presided over the first trial in federal court to examine if same-sex couples have a constitutional right to get married.
Even if the 9th Circuit panel agrees with him and overturns the ban approved by voters in November 2008, same-sex marriages are unlikely to resume in California any time soon. Supporters and opponents of Proposition 8 have said they would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court if they lose in the intermediate court.
Some legal observers believe the written heads-up the court gave Monday indicates it concluded there is no reason why Walker should have disclosed his relationship status while he had the case.
"The notice appears to indicate that the panel will rule on the constitutionality of Proposition 8. That seems to suggest that the court will deny the effort by Prop 8 proponents to vacate Judge Walker's ruling on recusal grounds, and also that it will find that the Prop. 8 proponents had standing to pursue the appeal," University of Pennsylvania Law School Professor Tobias Barrington Wolff said.
The panel heard arguments on the ban's civil rights implications more than a year ago but delayed a decision while it sought guidance from the California Supreme Court on whether Proposition 8's sponsors had legal authority to challenge Walker's ruling after the governor and state attorney general decided not to appeal it.
The California court ruled in November that the state's vigorous citizens' initiative process grants official proponents of ballot measures the right to defend their initiatives in court if state officials refuse to do so.
- Boy Scouts in Utah, nation face uncertain future
- LDS Church relationship with Boy Scouts in...
- What consumers need to know about chip...
- Imagine Dragons treated like home team at...
- Body found in suitcase near Saltair identified
- Utah natives receive rave reviews, make 'So...
- Sandy mailman's plea for books gets worldwide...
- Wright Words: Younger sister is living...
- LDS Church relationship with Boy Scouts... 296
- Boy Scouts in Utah, nation face... 132
- LDS Church 're-evaluating' Scouting... 103
- Mike Lee plotting tricky maneuver to... 88
- Profane and acclaimed: 'The Book of... 74
- Most Utahns oppose Supreme Court ruling... 65
- Lee takes on new strategy in fight... 45
- Is report on building prison in Draper... 35