Tweet
Here’s the actual text from Vaughn Walker’s court:
ORDER by Judge Walker denying [705] Motion to Stay. The clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment forthwith. That judgment shall be STAYED until August 18, 2010 at 5 PM PDT at which time defendants and all persons under their control or supervision shall cease to apply or enforce Proposition 8. (vrwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/12/2010)
[Ed. note: You can view the full document at this link: Prop 8 Stay Order. More about the denial here: Breaking: Judge Walker Denies Prop 8 Motion, Stays Decision till 8/18, by bmaz.]
15 Comments
No marriages until August 18th at 5pm.
Giving the Ninth Circuit time to formulate a reply to the inevitable H8er appeal….
Is it usual to give the Ninth less than a week to look at this ? Or is Judge Walker that confident that his ruling is rock solid ?
It’s not a week for them to decide the motion, it’s a week for them to decide if they will extend the temproray stay while they decide the motion for stay.
I know that sounds redundent
Thanks very much, Cynthia. I understood that much, although my question wasn’t clear.
Hit this link for bmaz’s thread that is filled with great information.
Please remember to donate some coin, to keep this site humming along.
The caterers in San Francisco will be busy very soon!
Thanks, Teddy, fingers crossed that everything runs smoothly through the 18th.
thank you Teddy !
I really liked what bmaz had to say about possible judges at the 9th
I’m very happy about this ruling.
“We’re walking. We’re moving.”
BTW, Teddy I almost feel like this is YOUR achievement. You have Been all over this for so long, and have patiently and eruditely explained not only the case, but the players and the context as well.
Congratulations Teddy bear.
You know, I just had a thought. Do you know who should get ther first two new marriage licenses issued after 8/18?
The palintiffs. They earned a place at teh head of the line
That would be so appropriate!
In the States
FranceThey Kiss on Main Street – Joni MitchellThanks you all, and yes, I think the four plaintiffs should probably get the first licenses, of course they have kids (the gals, anyway) so there’s no telling how summer camp or soccer practice might allow for waiting on line for marriage licenses at the clerk’s office. These people are very family-oriented.
Since a lot of the Stay Order decision talked about “standing”, a thought occurs to me.
Is there any way that the plaintiffs’ immediate marriages could affect their standing to defend the appeals?
Obviously, I Am Not A Lawyer!
Judge Walker’s finding that marriages performed after the lifting of the stay and before any possible reversal on appeal would still be valid (like the existing 18,000 same-sex marriages in California) could be construed to mean that the plaintiff’s interest would be moot.
A scary thought, but I had to say it.
Teddy: I’m new to the site, so I have not seen your prior explanations. I am sympathetic to your plight, but have principled reasons to dissent. It is my understanding that the 9th Circuit can issue a stay, or SCOTUS can issue a stay. And when the 9th Circuit hears the case (assuming there is standing for the appellants) if they reverse Judge Walker, SCOTUS can deny cert (leaving the reversal intact). Given the 9th Circuit’s history, a reversal is improbable. Thus, SCOTUS will ultimately decide the case. Another long shot is that the 9th Circuit will send the matter back for a retrial because of a lack of standing by the intervenors. If that happens, I do not know whether Judge Walker would be the trial judge again. Any thoughts? Thanks.