Landmark gay marriage trial starts today in California

As I write this, same sex marriages in California have resumed.

The legislative branch in effect did pick someone to represent the state. They drafted a statute that gave the proponent of a ballot initiative the authority to represent the state's interest when the initiative in challenged. The state is an abstract political entity. No one person could ever represent all the interests of the state all the time. But that's not what's at issue. What's at issue is a constitutional amendment drafted by a small group of dedicated supporters and passed by a majority of voters.The basic purpose served by the standing requirement is to ensure that the person advocating for the position has sufficient interest in the issue to provide zealous and effective advocacy in support of the issue. In the case of a citizen initiative, there's every reason to suppose that the duly elected officials of the state might not have that interest. The very purpose of the citizen initiative is to provide the citizenry a course for changing the law under circumstances where their elected representatives, for whatever reason, will not. To then say that those elected representatives, and only those elected representatives, can adequately represent the state's interests is perverse and irrational. In the abstract, which ultimately is where most laws are written, I can think of no person or group of people who would be better suited to zealously represent the interests of the state, as expressed by a majority of the voting population, than the proponents of the initiative.

Well, since the state was the defendant, the lawsuit applies to the whole state, even though it's only a federal district court decision. Another district couldn't decide it a different way because if another suit were filed, it would be dismissed as res judicata.

Actually, the Supreme Court returned it to the Ninth Circuit with instructions to vacate their opinion. That means that the only opinion left in force is the District Court's. It is exactly as if the appeal had never happened.

Perhaps Faith could take her rabid ACLU bashing to another thread and leave this one to the topic of gay marriage.

You are free to bash anything you like, but please stay on topic in this thread.

There is months' worth of schadenfreude piling up out there!