CA AG (former and prospective gov) Jerry Brown Asks Supreme Court to Overturn 8

[Ebowed]

You can see that liberals in CA are completely aghast that people are so "ignorant," "religious" or "uneducated" that they would vote yes on Prop 8.  It's even worse when a civil rights movement attacks African-Americans and Mormons as a form of self-identification!  When I saw the anti-Mormon commercials on TV I wanted to vomit.  When I heard that gay-rights rallies were yelling out the N-word I was similarly upset.

That ad is excellent.

From what I know of the prop 8 voter breakdown, young blacks were much more accepting of marriage equality than older blacks.  I think the gap was more generational than racial, even if blacks were less likely on average to support civil rights.

I have no sympathy for the Mormons though - who should know better than to use the government to force their views on others, after the way they were treated in the 19th century.  Unless, of course, they are willing to begin paying taxes like other religious organizations which endorse, actively recruit supporters for, and heavily fund political campaigns.

[Хahar 🤔]

But an amendment is part of the Constitution.  It's no different than the rest of the Constitution other than its date.

No offense, but are you familiar with the distinction between an "amendment" and a "revision" to the California state constitution? One requires 50%, the other, two-thirds. This indicates that not all additions to the constitution are equal. The tack Brown is taking relies entirely on that distinction, making the argument that Prop 8 should be held to be a revision, not a simple amendment, because it contradicts a principle the Supreme Court has judged integral and central to the state constitution.

Yes, I'm aware of that, but a change to the Constitution is still a change to the Constitution.

Consittutionally, it isn't. There are two kinds.

[Torie]

But an amendment is part of the Constitution.  It's no different than the rest of the Constitution other than its date.

No offense, but are you familiar with the distinction between an "amendment" and a "revision" to the California state constitution? One requires 50%, the other, two-thirds. This indicates that not all additions to the constitution are equal. The tack Brown is taking relies entirely on that distinction, making the argument that Prop 8 should be held to be a revision, not a simple amendment, because it contradicts a principle the Supreme Court has judged integral and central to the state constitution.

I don't think any proposition has been held to be a revision, and I would be shocked if Prop 8 is so labeled. The distinction is a mischievous one in any event - more of a distinction without a difference really, and in the eye of the beholder.

[Associate Justice PiT]

It's a good thing O'Reilly's opinion means next to nothing on this issue.

Well, the public perception and outrage at "activist courts overturning a democratically decided, majoritarian issue" or whatever will mean something

     Which might be problematic considering that the average person doesn't understand that that sort of thing is exactly why the courts exist. At least it kills any chance of gay marriage being outlawed in California.

[JSojourner]

Jerry Brown is a major FF.