Gay marriage ban backers seek Supreme Court review

By: Associated Press Email
By: Associated Press Email

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Backers of California's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriages are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overrule a federal appeals court that struck down the measure as unconstitutional.

Lawyers for the coalition of religious conservative groups that sponsored the ban, known as Proposition 8, petitioned the Supreme Court Tuesday to review the lower court's finding that the 2008 amendment to the state constitution violated the civil rights of gay and lesbian Californians.

The move had been expected since a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued its 2-1 decision earlier this year.

If the high court declines to take the case, it would clear the way for same-sex marriages to resume in California. Gay couples could get married in the state for several months before Proposition 8 passed.


You must be logged in to post comments.

Password (case sensitive):
Remember Me:

Read Comments

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
  • by Luke Location: GJ on Jul 31, 2012 at 08:02 PM
    It was a gay judge that struck the measure down and called it unconstitutional, but that is what should be expected from the champions of intolerance.
    • reply
      by Scott on Jul 31, 2012 at 08:07 PM in reply to Luke
      The inclinations of the judge don't matter if his decision was based on the principles of law. Pretty hard to imagine a court upholding discrimination.
      • reply
        by Jo on Aug 1, 2012 at 07:06 AM in reply to Scott
        Gay marriage---No gay marriage----discrimination???
        • reply
          by Scott on Aug 1, 2012 at 02:35 PM in reply to Jo
          Imagine if you couldn't get a drivers license because you were a woman. Would that be discrimination? Now imagine you couldn't get a marriage license because you wanted to marry another woman. What's the difference?
        • reply
          by Nun on Aug 1, 2012 at 03:50 PM in reply to Jo
          @Scott. The difference is she would not be having sex with the car.
        • reply
          by Scott on Aug 1, 2012 at 04:02 PM in reply to Jo
          And why should the government care about that?
      • reply
        by What on Aug 1, 2012 at 08:00 PM in reply to Scott
        And why would you care?
        • reply
          by Scott on Aug 1, 2012 at 08:31 PM in reply to What
          And that, ladies and gentlemen, sums up the problem in a nutshell. Why should anyone care. "I'm not gay. I don't want to marry someone of the same gender, so why should I care." Bet they said the same thing about segregation. "I'm not black. Why should I care?" Sorry, guys, but I'm not gay, and I still care. Guess its that atheist morality. Beats "Christian" morality any day.
        • reply
          by What on Aug 1, 2012 at 08:45 PM in reply to What
          Sure you are not GAY! Just like you are not an arrogant A*s.
        • reply
          by Scott on Aug 1, 2012 at 09:03 PM in reply to What
          And yet another one who thinks playground insults constitute a valid argument.
        • reply
          by What on Aug 2, 2012 at 05:45 AM in reply to What
          To Scott. You are who you are. Just because you don't approve does not make it an insult. The fact that you are a self-righteous, pompous, hypocritical, narrow minded A*$ is a fact. It would suck to be you. All your posts are arrogant rants of self proclaimed superiority. You think you are some open minded, fair thinking person when in fact you are a bigoted, narrow minded zealot who is guilty of unbelievable intolerance.
  • by Where's Scott on Jul 31, 2012 at 06:41 PM
    Where is our closet liberal, elitist, self righteous gay Scott?? He should be neck deep in indignation right about now.
    • reply
      by Scott on Jul 31, 2012 at 08:00 PM in reply to Where's Scott
      Laughing at you, mainly.
    • reply
      by Scott on Jul 31, 2012 at 08:04 PM in reply to Where's Scott
      Why should I care if they appeal the decision? I doubt they have a Tea Partier's chance at an ACLU meeting of succeeding, so let them try all they want. The more times discriminatory bans like this get rejected, the better.
      • reply
        by Where's Scott on Aug 1, 2012 at 07:59 PM in reply to Scott
        And therrrre he is! So how do you breath the air up there?
        • reply
          by Scott on Aug 1, 2012 at 08:31 PM in reply to Where's Scott
          Day late, bud. Keeping up with events, I see.
  • by Oh Look on Jul 31, 2012 at 12:28 PM
    Look Look another shiny media distraction.. Forget about you job. High prices (caused by regulation, debt etc) Pay attention to this ... Don't look there... Squirrel, Squirrel !!
KKCO NBC 11 News
2531 Blichmann Avenue
Grand Junction, CO 81505

Station Phone: 970.243.1111
Business Fax: 970.243.1770
Newsroom Fax: 970.245.3793
News Tip & Contest Line: 970.255.8477
Copyright © 2002-2016 - Designed by Gray Digital Media - Powered by Clickability 164472826 -
Gray Television, Inc.