August 13, 2010 2:00 AM

Gay Marriages Remain on Hold in Calif.

By
CBSNews
(CBS/AP)  Updated at 6:40 p.m. ET

A federal judge on Thursday put gay marriages on hold for at least another six days in California, raising hopes among same-sex couples that they soon will be able to tie the knot after years of agonizing delays.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker gave opponents of same-sex weddings until Aug. 18 at 5 p.m. to get a ruling from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on whether gay marriage should resume. Gay marriages could happen at that point or be put off indefinitely depending on how the court rules.

Walker was ruling on requests to impose a stay that would keep Proposition 8 in effect while its sponsors appeal his decision. He struck down the state's voter-approved gay marriage ban last week in a case many believe is destined for the Supreme Court.

"I am optimistic this decision will be overruled probably by the Supreme Court if not by the American people," Proposition 8 supporter Maggie Gallagher of the National Organization for Marriage told CBS News. "The majority of the American people have kind of drawn a line in our sand and said, 'This isn't true. It's not good. We don't believe in it, and we don't like it."

CBS Radio News Senior Legal Analyst Andrew Cohen reports that in denying the stay, Walker again noted a lack of evidence supporting arguments made by Proposition 8 supporters.

"For the second time in two weeks the judge noted that supporters of Proposition 8 simply didn't convince him with any evidence of why the stay should have been granted, and that's why he denied it," said Cohen. "He said that the facts have been clear and that folks who are against same-sex marriage were unable to convince him that it should be blocked pending this review."

Gay couples lined up at city halls and clerks' offices all across California expecting the stay to be lifted, CBS Radio News reports. After Walker's ruling, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom urged patience.

"People will be fine," Newsom told CBS Radio News. "Obviously some disappointment that they couldn't come today but this gives people time to call friends and family and organize, and I imagine there will be a lot of proposals in the next week."

Dozens of gay marriage supporters who had gathered outside San Francisco's City Hall, a block from the federal courthouse, erupted in cheers when the decision came out. The crowd included a handful of same-sex couples who had arrived early Thursday morning to fill out marriage license applications in hopes that the judge would allow nuptials to commence immediately.

Teresa Rowe, 31, and her partner, Kristin Orbin, 31, said they were still happy with the decision even though the ceremony didn't happen.

"It's sad that we have to wait a little longer, but it's been six years," Rowe said.

Three people protested among the crowd to oppose Walker's ruling Thursday.

"It's a really sad day for Californians, for families, for our future and for voters that a federal judge has trampled on the civil rights of voters," said Luke Otterstad, 24, of Sacramento.

Opponents of same-sex marriage said they want Proposition 8 to stay in effect until their appeal of Walker's ruling is decided by higher courts.

They have argued in court papers that resuming gay marriage now would cause legal chaos if the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals or U.S. Supreme Court eventually reverse Walker's ruling.

Charles J. Cooper, lead counsel for the Proposition 8 supporters, said his legal team intends to ask the appeals court to immediately impose a stay of Walker's ruling, a move that would halt gay marriages while the case is pending before the 9th Circuit.

In Walker's 136-page decision last week, he said gay marriages should begin immediately, but he agreed to suspend weddings until he could consider the legal arguments.

In response, lawyers for gay couples, California Gov. Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown quickly filed legal motions asking that same-sex marriages be allowed to resume immediately.

"I am pleased to see Judge Walker lift his stay and provide all Californians the liberties I believe everyone deserves," Schwarzenegger said Thursday.

Gay Marriage Judge's Personal Life Debated

California voters passed Proposition 8 as a state constitutional amendment in November 2008, five months after the California Supreme Court legalized same-sex unions and an estimated 18,000 same-sex couples already had tied the knot.

Walker said on Thursday that ban proponents didn't convince him that anyone would be harmed by allowing same-sex marriages to resume.

"The evidence at trial showed, however, that Proposition 8 harms the state of California," Walker said.

Walker also turned aside arguments that marriages performed now could be thrown into legal chaos if Proposition 8 is later upheld by an appeals court.

But Walker said such weddings would appear to be legal even if the ban is later reinstated. He pointed to the 18,000 same-sex couples who married legally in the five months that gay marriage was legal in California as proof.

Walker also said that no one can claim harm by allowing same-sex weddings to go forward, but banning them harms gays.

Finally, Walker said it also appears doubtful that the opponents of the ban have any right to appeal his decision striking down a state law that he said should have been defended by either Gov. Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Brown.

The case now goes before a special "motions panel" of three judges at the appeals court, the largest and busiest federal appeals court in the nation with jurisdiction over nine western states.

The panel consists of two judges appointed by Democrats and a third by a Republican.

President Reagan appointed Judge Edward Leavy to the appeals court in 1987. Leavy, who is semi-retired, has served as judge in the state and federal courts in Oregon since 1957.

President Clinton nominated Judge Michael Daly Hawkins to the court in 1994 and Judge Sidney Thomas in 1995.

Hawkins, based in Phoenix, served as Arizona's U.S. Attorney under President Jimmy Carter and also worked as a special prosecutor for the Navajo Nation from 1985 to 1989.

Thomas, who keeps his chambers in Bozeman, Mont., made President Obama's short list to fill the U.S. Supreme Court vacancy that was filled last week by Elena Kagan.

A new three-judge panel will be chosen sometime next year to decide the appeal. Lawyers for both sides have been ordered to file their legal arguments by the end of the year.

More on Same-Sex Marriage:

Republicans Quiet Over Same-Sex Marriage Ruling
Same-Sex Marriage Decision "Far From Over"
Calif. Moves To Resume Same-Sex Weddings
Prop 8 Ruling Divides Political Candidates

Santa Cruz County Clerk Gail Pellerin, president of the California Association of Clerk and Elected Officials, said county agencies that issue marriage licenses would be ready to serve same-sex couples whenever they get the green light.

Before deciding the case, Judge Walker heard 13 days of testimony and arguments.

Defense lawyers argued that the ban was necessary to safeguard the traditional understanding of marriage and to encourage responsible childbearing.

The judge dismissed the notion that gay Americans were seeking a new right as opposed to one already guaranteed them under the Constitution.

He said that preventing gays from marrying does nothing to strengthen heterosexual unions or serve any purpose that justifies the ban's discriminatory effect.

"Same-sex couples are identical to opposite-sex couples in the characteristics relevant to the ability to form successful marital unions," Walker wrote. "Like opposite-sex couples, same-sex couples have happy, satisfying relationships and form deep emotional bonds and strong commitments to their partners."

CBS/AP
Add a Comment See all 96 Comments
by Wisdomspeak August 19, 2010 4:18 PM EDT
First, marriage is about a mutually exclusive sexual relationship between two people of opposite sex. It is NOT about love and companionship as gay activists have claimed. Man did NOT design the marriage relationship. God created the male/female anatomies to harmonize together called Marriage! Biblical clarification - an example of love commitment between two men, but it was Not a marriage! David & Jonathan. 2 Sam 1 It contained No unnatural sex act. Here?s a marriage that lacked love/commitment. Gen 29 Jacob felt betrayed having formed a marriage relationship with Leah, but it produced 7 kids. Bible vs. casual sex. Deut 22 If it is not for the purpose of a marriage, it involved the death of one or both parties or they were considered married! Gay activists make the claim that legal same-sex marriages do not harm heterosexuals. Yes, it does! Here?s what are naturally inherent in any law of the land ~ moral righteousness and just. Standards by which we can direct our lives in the safest, most successful and profitable way, not only for the individual, but for society. Prop. 8 contain all of the above as well as being against unsound doctrine. Laws are for the unjust. 1Tim 1 Wrongfully declaring same-sex couples as marriages will lead us down a path that will over time be almost impossible to undo. It?s not difficult to see benefits society gleams from Bible marriages. Gen 9 The human race continues on. It is for these blessings that incentives are attached. That?s what they want! They want the incentives without providing the blessings. They think they can provide the blessings through surrogates or sperm donations. But as these avenues become the only means to continue the human race, it will increase disorder and confusion. As society is forced to accept their abnormal marriages, we will be on a moving escalator that claims to be more open-minded and accepting, but is actually moving towards chaos and the extinction of the human race!!!
Reply to this comment
by StraightRights August 13, 2010 4:35 PM EDT
I think we should adopt Irans Gay laws
Reply to this comment
by ge556 August 14, 2010 10:13 AM EDT
Yeah, you're as bad as the neo-nazi racists. Maybe you should follow the old conservative advice, if you don't like our freedom, move to Iran.
by StraightRights August 14, 2010 12:14 PM EDT
No I wont abandon my country America. That i grew up loving like a true patriot. The gay community has evil written all over it . What a dark world you live in full of fears and hate. Go ahead and deny it we dont believe you .We dont stand by you
by NoCompromise August 13, 2010 3:32 PM EDT
Man can create, change and overturn human laws, but God's Laws are eternal.
http://revelationrainbow.com/Licensed_to_Wed.asp
Reply to this comment
by StraightRights August 13, 2010 4:23 PM EDT
UM NO I am quite secure about my sexual choice and I know that it is the right choice my wife and I are able to have babies and kiss at the park without the help of "Breeders" your sick alien like word for the idiots that help gays breed. O ok I must be gay because I dont agree lol ahahahahaha NOT . All of you know in your heart what you are doing is wrong . My conscience however is clear . Nice try
by StraightRights August 13, 2010 4:27 PM EDT
Oh yea and you dont know your gay until you try it ahahahahahahahahahahahaahahaha how many of you fall victim to that one. Your adult friend that taught you gay was OK was just trying to get down your pants . Guys do it to girls all the time and that is natural but your NOT
by StraightRights August 13, 2010 1:30 PM EDT
I really dont care if gays marry or not . I think we should move to strike them from adopting children or procreating via testube .Children should not be forced to recognize gay as proper. I have seen gay couples trying to explain themselves to children and it is a lie . And no need to be sad I dont hate you for your mental illness(GAY) I am just protecting my heritage just like you.
Reply to this comment
by StraightRights August 13, 2010 12:55 PM EDT
So then gay bashing should be legal? Shouldnt the people that dislike gays be able to bash them? Isnt that a personal freedom within our evolving constitution ? Shouldnt we be able to teach our children that GAY is destroying America? You have the right to be gay but sodomy is unlawful . Maybe a stern prison sentence for sodomy is needed to back up your vows. Lets have a straight rights parade walk down the street with our spouses ,feeling all good for ourselves . Naa thats gay . We just want to be left alone to make our private decisions without some gay folks trying to push thier junk at our schools and libraries . GO AWAY GAY PEOPLE WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE AS GOD PLANNED US TO BE 1 MAN AND 1 WOMAN
Reply to this comment
by AttentionDeficit August 13, 2010 1:08 PM EDT
You want to be left alone, but won't grant gays the same consideration? Go ahead and bash gay people if you want. I am pretty certain that you will have lots of people standing behind you....in jail
by StraightRights August 13, 2010 1:11 PM EDT
yea a lot of gay stuff happens in jail your right . It kidof like when gay people say "how do you know your not gay until you tried it" LOL the old gay pick up line some dude used to slay you. And thier is no jail when you bash in private.
by StraightRights August 13, 2010 12:25 PM EDT
Gays are not looking for privacy They are looking for parades and attention . Even if this is passed the gay people will look for some other way to get attention because that is why most of them became gay for attention. The normal people wont exept it even if some gay judge you paid off overturns the votes. If on an island with all gay men your kind would die off . with all gay women your kind would die off.Simply put gay is wrong . Deal with it . Your fellow americans wont stand behind you EVER
Reply to this comment
by AttentionDeficit August 13, 2010 12:46 PM EDT
StraightRights: So, you believe orientation is a choice? At what age did you make yours? You spell poorly and your words make you sound like an ignorant bigot. Choke on that, motherscratcher
by StraightRights August 13, 2010 1:08 PM EDT
Spoken like a true hater . You dont value my opinion that gay is wrong? and you say I am a bigot because I dont value yours. I wont choke on anything I am happily married have lots of money and will spend my spare time defending my cause Straight rights! Choke on that ! Oh no you wont choke your used to it . 8========>
See all 5 Replies
by RobAla August 13, 2010 8:34 AM EDT
What is truly wrong is that after a state with millions of voters decide that the term "marriage" should be reserved for one man and one woman, one man (judge)is able to toss out the voice and wishes of millions. This needs to finally be pushed up to the Supreme Court.

No one in California prevented people of the same gender from having relationships. They only voted to retain the long time traditional definition of marriage. Here we have a minority (gays and lesbians) forcing their will on the majority. We are so concerned about minorities being offended, that we have begun to ignore situations in which the majority is offended. We need to step back and take a long look at what is happening here.
Reply to this comment
by AttentionDeficit August 13, 2010 8:43 AM EDT
What is happening here is following the constitution. Or at least that is what the ruling said. We will see what falls out on appeal. Personally, I don't think that the government has any place in determining who gets married. I would favor domestic partner agreements for both straight and gay couples, with the idea of "marriage" being reserved for religious organizations.
by StraightRights August 13, 2010 12:34 PM EDT
The government did not decide WE THE PEOPLE did . GAY IS WRONG doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure that out . Straight America WE have to fight harder . Even if this gay bill is passed I will teach my children that gay is a wrong choice and that it destroys this country.
by missapril_w August 13, 2010 7:59 AM EDT
People shouldn't be forbidden to enter into a legal contract based on the sex of the parties involved. Why is that not the issue? Why are we even bringing up the "m" word at all?

And to the folks that say the judge is going against the will of the people: you cannot vote and pass something that's unconstitutional (against even your state constitution) and expect the newly voted in law to stay in force.
Reply to this comment
by askagain August 13, 2010 1:46 AM EDT
slow-news-day August - I reviewed a number of summaries of Roe v. Wade. Justice Blackburn made abortion a right with his argument that a woman has a right to privacy. Many legal authorities feel that Blackburn's interpretation was a stretch, at best. In other words, Blackburn and some other justices were hell bent on making abortion a right one way or another. Apparently, that is a perogative of Supreme Court Justices. That doesn't mean that a different group of justices would reach the same conclusion and that has been the whole point of my argument. The same may hold true of gay marriage. Will the courts beyond that of Judge Walker's court uphold the California voters and state's rights or add a new right by allowing gay marriages by agreeing with Judge Walker? No emotion, just a legal question.
Reply to this comment
by slow-news-day August 13, 2010 2:19 AM EDT
"Justice Blackburn made abortion a right with his argument that a woman has a right to privacy."


I think you missed the obvious point. He simply acknowledged the right to privacy.
by StraightRights August 13, 2010 12:41 PM EDT
The point is a judge will pull a rabbit out of his ass if he or she wants something to pass. The exact crap that has ruined this country. GAY IS WRONG KEEP IT AWAY FROM OUR CHILDREN . This right to privacy has been bent to fit . Why can I kill my baby in the womb ? Because I have right to privacy ? So why cant people kill thier baby after they are born ? wouldnt that be private too? This country is being destroyed by cowboy court justices who dont care what the people think as long as they get the payoff. SAD
by stormkeep August 13, 2010 1:27 AM EDT
When this country was founded it was founded on the principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence, which was pretty clear that all of us have the inalienable right to "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."
How far we have fallen since then, when a majority of the voters in any state think that it is okay to deprive others of the last of these just because they or their chosen religion do not agree with it.

Opposition to gay marriage is, at the core, religious persecution. The kind of persecution that many of the founders of this great nation came here to escape. I find it sad, and unfortunate, that so few people of this nation either understand, or consider important, those founding ideals.

Personally, I oppose gay marriage myself...but I do NOT consider it my right to impose my beliefs on others. If I considered that appropriate, I wouldn't be able to look in the mirror and call myself an american.
Reply to this comment
by ur_shadow August 13, 2010 2:04 AM EDT
I couldn't agree more - religious irrationality has been abused to the point of even justifying slavery - well f*ck that kind of religion - it is full of hate. And thank you for understanding that what is right is more important than what you want. I myself am against abortion but would never deny the right of a woman to choose.
by MrOpinionated August 13, 2010 10:24 AM EDT
The founding documents are based on Christian princilples.
See all 96 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook