Read Attorney General Jerry Brown’s filing here, Governor Schwarzenegger’s here.
7:10 PM: Two same-sex couples asked a federal judge in San Francisco today to allow gay and lesbian marriages to resume in California immediately, arguing that “the public interest strongly favors” such a move.
The couples filed a brief asking U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker to turn down a bid by Proposition 8 sponsors for a stay while they appeal a ruling in which he struck down the voter-approved measure banning same-sex marriage.
Walker issued the decision Wednesday, but granted a temporary stay blocking the ruling from going into effect. He ordered both sides to submit briefs by today on whether he should issue a longer-term stay during the appeal. The appeal could take months.
Lawyers for the two couples wrote, “No public interest is served by perpetuating Proposition 8’s discriminatory effects and continuing to ban thousands of California citizens from exercising their fundamental right to marry.”
They said, “Each new day that right is denied is a day that can never be returned to them – a wrong that never can be remedied.”
Couples Kris Perry and Sandra Stier of Berkeley and Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo of Burbank were joined in the brief by the city of San Francisco, which was allowed to join the case on their behalf.
Earlier this afternoon, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown each filed separate briefs opposing a stay.
Both officials said they too believe that allowing the ruling to go into effect would serve the public interest.
Schwarzenegger’s lawyers wrote, “The administration believes the public interest is best served by permitting the court’s judgment to go into effect, thereby restoring the right of same-sex couples to marry in California.”
Brown argued in his brief that there is no justification for a stay because Walker held a full trial that “conclusively demonstrated that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.”
Schwarzenegger and Brown were both named as defendants in the 2009 federal lawsuit, but both declined to defend Proposition 8, and the initiative’s sponsors and their campaign committee, ProtectMarriage.com, stepped in to defend it.
The sponsors had not yet filed their brief as of 7 p.m. But in their original request for a stay, filed Tuesday evening before Walker issued his ruling, they argued that the state would be harmed by allowing same-sex marriages to resume before the appeal is resolved.
Any new marriages would be under a “cloud of uncertainty” because the marriages could be invalidated if the Proposition 8 sponsors win their appeal.
Allowing marriages now “would inflict harm on the affected couples and place administrative burdens on the state,” the sponsors argued.
The same-sex couples and Schwarzenegger argued in their briefs, however, that the state would not be burdened because it previously handled the licenses for 18,000 same-sex marriages in 2008.
Those weddings were performed between June 2008, when a California Supreme Court decision allowing same-sex marriage under the state Constitution went into effect, and Nov. 4, 2008, when a 52 percent majority of voters enacted Proposition 8 as a state constitutional amendment.
The California Supreme Court later upheld Proposition 8 in May 2009, but left the 18,000 existing marriages in effect.
The case before Walker was the first in the nation to go to trial on a challenge under the U.S. Constitution rather than a state constitution.
The temporary stay will remain in effect until Walker reviews today’s briefs and issues a ruling.
If he denies the request for a stay, he could follow a common court procedure of keeping the temporary stay in effect for a few more days so that the Proposition 8 sponsors can appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for a long-term stay.
In their filing on Tuesday, the sponsors asked Walker, if he refuses an extended stay, to continue the temporary stay for at least a week so that they can seek a stay from the 9th Circuit.
The plaintiffs today asked Walker to limit any continuation of the stay to seven days.
ProtectMarriage.com spokeswoman Carla Hass said this evening she did not know when the sponsors will file their brief, but said it will be “well in advance” of the midnight deadline.
4:24 PM: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown asked a federal judge in San Francisco today to allow same-sex marriages in California to resume immediately.
They filed separate briefs telling U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker they oppose a bid by supporters of Proposition 8 for a stay while they appeal the decision issued by Walker on Wednesday.
Lawyers for Schwarzenegger wrote, “The administration believes the public interest is best served by permitting the court’s judgment to go into effect, thereby restoring the right of same-sex couples to marry in California.”
Brown argued in his brief that there is no justification for a stay because Walker held a full trial that “conclusively demonstrated that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.”
Walker, ruling in a lawsuit filed by two same-sex couples, concluded Wednesday that Proposition 8, the state’s voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, violated the U.S. Constitution’s guarantees of equal treatment and due process.
But he issued a temporary stay suspending his ruling and ordered parties in the case to file briefs by today on the question of whether he should continue the stay during the appeal. The appeal could take months.
Schwarzenegger and Brown were the first parties in the case to file briefs on that question today. As of 4 p.m., lawyers for the two couples and for the Proposition 8 sponsors had not yet filed their briefs.
Schwarzenegger and Brown were both named as defendants in the federal lawsuit filed last year, but both declined to defend the initiative. The sponsors of Proposition 8 stepped in to defend it at the trial before Walker.
Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, issued a statement saying, “We are truly grateful to Attorney General Brown for opposing a stay in this landmark case, as there is simply no valid reason to deny a loving same-sex couple the freedom to marry.”
