Search for: "PROPOSITION 8 OFFICIAL PROPONENTS"
Results 21 - 40
of 185
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Sep 2014, 9:01 pm
Perry ruling (involving Proposition 8, a California initiative banning same-sex marriage) using overly broad reasoning that makes it hard, if not impossible, for official proponents of an initiative to ever defend the measure in federal court when elected representatives decline to defend. [read post]
21 Aug 2014, 9:04 pm
Perry, barring an appeal by the proponents of the California ban, the ballot measure known as “Proposition 8. [read post]
28 Jul 2014, 11:57 am
The case was argued by Ted Olson, who recently co-authored a book with David Boies about their challenge to Proposition 8. [read post]
21 Mar 2014, 3:58 pm
There have been two other trials in history on the validity of same-sex marriage bans — one in Hawaii in 1996 (a state where same-sex marriage rights have since been alternatively banned and then granted), and the trial in federal court in California in 2010 that led to a decision striking down that state’s “Proposition 8″ ban. [read post]
12 Mar 2014, 9:23 am
When the California voters passed Proposition 8 to ban gay marriage and the California government refused to defend it on appeal, the job of defending it fell to the official proponents of the initiative. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 9:01 pm
That provision gives the official proponent the power to “supervise” any legal defense provided by the Attorney General, and the power to hire, at public expense, outside counsel who will then be made “Special Deputy Attorney General,” to defend the measure if the proponent, in his “sole determination,” feels that the Attorney General is “not providing an adequate defense. [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 10:01 pm
Like California’s Proposition 37, Washington’s Initiative 522 started out with a massive lead in the polls that melted away during a heated campaign that saw GMO labeling proponents heavily outspent by major players in the food manufacturing industry. [read post]
29 Dec 2013, 5:30 pm
Instead, that case went off on a procedural point — the proponents of “Proposition 8″ had no right to appeal, the Court said. [read post]
31 Jul 2013, 9:01 pm
Is that where the Proposition 8 political-legal opera should end? [read post]
16 Jul 2013, 9:01 pm
To be sure, the Proposition 8 proponents are arguing that more is at stake here than simply same-sex marriage; the proponents claim that state officials are flouting the rule of law by refusing to comply with Proposition 8 until an appellate court has invalidated it on the merits. [read post]
15 Jul 2013, 7:44 am
Petitioners, who were the official proponents of Proposition 8, argue in part in their filing with the California Supreme Court:The Perry injunction is no bar to this outcome, for at least two reasons. [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 5:10 pm
In particular, the Court needed to steer clear of damaging the initiative device in general even as it denied standing to Proposition 8’s sponsors in particular. [read post]
29 Jun 2013, 2:50 pm
The Supreme Court held that the proponents of Proposition 8 could not file appeals in federal court. [read post]
28 Jun 2013, 7:17 am
The majority held that the official proponents of Prop 8 did not have standing to defend Prop 8 in federal court. [read post]
27 Jun 2013, 8:03 am
After a bench trial, the court declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional and enjoined the public officials named as defendants from enforcing the law. [read post]
27 Jun 2013, 7:47 am
Additionally, the High Court dismissed the companion same-sex marriage case, Hollingsworth v Perry, holding that the proponents of California’s “Proposition 8,” which amended the state constitution to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, lacked standing to appeal a federal district court’s ruling that the ballot initiative was unconstitutional. [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 8:48 pm
Judge Walker wrote: "Because Proposition 8 is unconstitutional under both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses, the court orders entry of judgment permanently enjoining its enforcement; prohibiting the official [state and county] defendants from applying or enforcing Proposition 8 and directing the official defendants that all persons under their control or supervision shall not apply or enforce Proposition 8." [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 7:58 pm
However when Proposition 8 was challenged in federal district court, the court permitted the official initiative proponents to intervene as defendants. [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 6:18 pm
California state officials declined to defend Proposition 8, and the District Court allowed the Proponents (the parties who put Proposition 8 on the ballot) to defend it. [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 2:25 pm
California could have given the proponents some sort of official status as its representatives. [read post]
