LA TIMES Urges Attorney General To Reject Prop 8

Thursday's Los Angeles Times editorializes in favor of California Attorney General Jerry Brown to oppose Proposition 8 on constitutional grounds in his brief before the California Supreme Court which is due to be filed today.

Among the many legal opinions on Proposition 8 that the California Supreme Court will consider, the most high-profile one will come from Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown. By Friday, Brown is supposed to deliver his legal brief on whether the initiative banning same-sex marriage is an amendment to the state Constitution or, as opponents claim, a fundamental revision of it, which would require far more than a simple majority vote to take effect. As California's top lawyer, Brown is bound by his oath to defend the state's laws. But in this case, does that mean defending the will of the voters, or defending the Constitution from the will of the voters? Either way, Brown must deliver a robust and sincere argument that reflects his honest interpretation. In other words, he has to call it as he sees it.

As obvious as that sounds, it's not the role that attorneys general have commonly played; historically, the official legal representative for the state or nation defends newly passed laws against court challenges. Nor is this an easily resolved constitutional issue.

Certainly, Proposition 8 is not a wholesale rewrite of the state Constitution. The question is whether fundamental change has to mean extensive and elaborate change, or whether it's enough that a ban on gay marriage deprives a group that has long been a target of discrimination of an essential constitutional right.

The question deserves a well-considered answer by the court -- and an honestly rendered argument from Brown. If Brown deems Proposition 8 an unconstitutional revision, the state deserves better than a pro-forma argument defending it simply because that's what his office has usually done -- just as Brown should defend the measure vigorously if, in his opinion, it is an amendment, even though he opposed it before the election.

Though it's the less common path, there are precedents in which attorneys general have taken a stance on constitutional grounds, rather than on the idea that they must defend the will of the voters no matter their own legal beliefs. In a 1983 case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Atty. Gen. William French Smith sided against a law that would have allowed a single house of Congress to overrule immigration decisions. In 1967, California Atty. Gen. Thomas C. Lynch argued against Proposition 14, a rollback of fair-housing laws that was ultimately found unconstitutional.

Californians on both sides of the gay-marriage debate deserve an equally principled argument from Brown.

It will be interesting to see how Brown walks a fine line between what he actually thinks the law requires and how that relates to his possible gubernatorial campaign in 2010. Most of the other top Democratic contenders for Governor of California are strong supporters of civil marriage for everyone: Gavin Newsom, Antonio Villaraigosa and Jack O'Connell.

New NO ON PROP 8 Ad Features Voice of Samuel L. Jackson

Samuel L. Jackson narrates the new No on Proposition 8 ad, which puts this constitutional amendment in the context of previous shameful discriminatory actions throughout history. The text of the new No on Proposition 8 ad is below

"It wasn't that long ago that discrimination was legal in California.

"Japanese Americans were confined in internment camps.

"Armenians couldn't buy a house in the Central Valley.

"Latinos and African Americans were told who they could and could not marry.

"It was a sorry time in our history.

"Today the sponsors of Prop 8 want to eliminate fundamental rights.

"We have an obligation to pass along to our children a more tolerant, more decent society.

"Vote No on Prop 8 it's unfair and it's wrong."

The text is good and the visuals are strong but the music is very weak! Bring back the fast "Tubular Bells" soundtrack from the Jack O'Connell and Dianne Feinstein ads. It communicates a sense of urgency that strengthens all of the NO ON PROP 8 ads.

Prop 8 Ad Hits Back On Lies About Kids and Schools

Finally! The NO ON PROP 8 campaign has issued a new television ad refuting the misleading and blatantly false statements by the heterosexual supremacist proponents of the constitutional amendment to strip the right to marry for same-sex couples in California. They have been running television and radio ads saying that unless Proposition 8 passes, children as young as kindergartners will be taught about gay marriage in schools and parents will be powerless to do anything about it. Sounds scary? To some, yes, but it is simply not true.

The ad features California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell, who is also an expected candidate for the Democratic nomination for Governor in 2010. Additionally, my former boss (as President of Occidental College), Ted Mitchell, who is now the Chairman of the State Board of Education has signed on to a statement pointing out the California law has no provisions which would require schools to teach about gay marriage or any kind of marriage!

"The Yes on 8 ads are alarming and irresponsible," O'Connell said. "Our public schools are not required to teach about marriage. And, in fact, curriculum involving health issues is chosen by local school governing boards.
No matter how you feel about marriage, we can all agree discrimination is wrong. That's why I'm voting no on 8."

"That ad is wrong. Not one person with any credibility has said otherwise," [former (Republican) State Superintendent of Public Education Delaine] Eastin said. "Prop. 8 is about one thing, pure and simple, and that's taking away civil rights. Prop. 8 isn't about reading school books or teaching, it's about treating people differently - that is the one and only thing on the ballot."

"Prop 8 has nothing to do with education, and the proponents know it," Eastin continued. "Not one word in Prop 8 mentions education and no child can be forced, against the will of their parents, to attend any health-related class. California law prohibits it."
President of the California State School Board, Ted Mitchell, said: "Let me be clear, there is nothing in California state law that would require the teaching of marriage and that will not change. These ads are ridiculous and they are an insult to California's voters."
Karen Getman, of Remcho, Johansen and Purcell, lawyer for the NO on Prop. 8 campaign and author of the legal brief that resulted in a Sacramento Superior Court Judge ruling that the Yes on 8 campaign's claims are "misleading and false," said: "Nothing in California law requires children to be taught about marriage in public schools. The current ad has the same 'false and misleading' statement about education that the judge rejected this summer."

"There's one thing educators agree on: nothing in Prop 8 has anything to do with schools or children," said Reed Hastings, former president of the California State Board of Education. "Prop 8 is about eliminating rights for our friends, families and colleagues, and that's why I urge all Californians to vote no on Prop 8."

The California Teachers Association and the California School Boards Association both maintain that Prop 8 has nothing to do with teaching in public schools. In addition, education leaders across the state have endorsed the NO on Prop. 8 campaign, including Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education President Monica Garcia, Davis Joint Unified School Board President Sheila Allen and San Francisco Board of Education Vice-President Kim-Shree Maufas.

As an educator myself I find it distressing that education is what the proponents of Proposition 8 have decided to lie about, instead of talking about why they want to enact this constitutional amendment they are simply making stuff up about what will happen if it fails.

Poizner Announces Run For California Governor

California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, a Silicon Valley businessman who has previously spent vast sums of his private fortune to further his political career, announced the creation of an exploratory committee for the 2010 Gubernatorial Republican primary nomination.

Previously, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom announced his exploratory committee for Governor. Other Democrats expected to run are Antonio Villaraigosa, California Attorney General Jerry Brown, California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell and possibly U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein