Could the Anti-Gay Bias of Prop 8 Sponsors Lead to Reversal? Maybe.

"We really have nothing against gays," opponents of same-sex nuptials keep insisting.  "We just want to preserve traditional marriage."  That's always been the argument of the anti-equality forces who work tirelessly to deny rights to LGBT Americans.  It's a lie, of course.

Now it looks like California's Prop 8 might be overturned if it can be shown that backers of the narrowly passed measure were motivated by homophobia.  Bob Egelko writes on SFGate:  A federal judge has ordered sponsors of California's Proposition 8 to release campaign strategy documents that opponents believe could show that backers of the same-sex marriage ban were motivated by prejudice against gays.  Plaintiffs in a federal suit seeking to overturn Prop. 8 - two same-sex couples, a gay-rights organization and the city of San Francisco - contend that the measure's real purpose was to strip a historically persecuted minority group of rights held by the majority.  If the courts find that the ballot measure was motivated by discrimination, they could strike it down without having to decide whether gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry.  "The intent or purpose of Prop. 8 is central to this litigation," Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker declared Thursday in requiring backers of the November 2008 measure to give the opposing side their internal campaign communications.

An attorney representing the sponsors of Proposition 8 loftily told the judge that his clients' motivations for pushing the measure were legally irrelevant.  Judge Walker rejected that claim.  From CBS13:  The judge agreed with lawyers for two unmarried same-sex couples who have sued to strike down the ban, known as Proposition 8, that confidential communications between the campaign's leaders and professional consultants could reveal a rationale for denying gays the right to wed that is relevant to the case.  The lawsuit argues that the measure was motivated by hostility toward gays and as such must be struck down as inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equality.  An October 14th hearing in San Francisco will determine whether the suit will move forward to trial in January of 2010.

Back to Egelko:  In previous rulings, Walker has said the constitutionality of Prop. 8 is not an open-and-shut legal question but could depend on a variety of factors, including whether backers were biased against gays and lesbians.  He amplified that view Thursday in ordering Prop. 8's sponsors to disclose documents, including notes and e-mails between campaign officials and consultants, that discussed their strategy and the message they wanted to send to the voters.  Although "voters cannot be asked to explain their votes," Walker said, a ballot measure's authors and strategists can be scrutinized to see what their motives were.  (And also if they misrepresented those motives to the citizens of California.)

Kudos to Judge Vaughn Walker for making public what the bigots want to keep hidden.  Once the court gets a look at the undoubtedly hateful emails and devious stratagems of Prop 8 advocates, people will begin to realize what actually drives that wagon.  It's not - and never has been - "defending traditional marriage."

Break out the popcorn, folks.  This is going to be a spectacle.

Comments

[Shagata Ganai]

Little, tiny spots of justice in a land filling up with injustice. Go Judge Walker!

[Trent]

This should be an eye opener to the voters who bought into their lies. I really would like to read the minutes of those meetings.

[Amanda]

I hope all their dirty laundry comes out. If they didn't have anything to hide they wouldn't be fighting this so hard. Good job, Judge!