The California Supreme Court yesterday unanimously denied a petition for extraordinary relief that would have removed the anti-same-sex marriage initiative from the November 2008 ballot (here is the Court's marriage cases site).The National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) argued in its petition that the initiative, which would strip same-sex couples of the right to marry, is such a significant change in the California Constitution that it constitutes a revision, not a mere amendment, to the Constitution and therefore requires a more deliberative democratic process before being presented to voters. (credit for images) If passed, the measure would strip a fundamental right from a specified minority – which is just the sort of majoritarian action that courts, not electorates, are best positioned to reckon with. Donna Ryu, a clinical professor of law at the University of California,
(including me – and our Legal History Blog colleague, Mary Dudziak). Unfortunately, the Court did not address the merits of the petition.For me, having recently moved into the democratic chaos of
But it’s being part of a California lesbian family that makes me feel as if history -- and marriage -- have been thrust upon me, like it or not. Everyone has asked, “so, are you getting married now?!” Yes, I think we are, but I can’t help but be startled by the question. Perhaps I should have spent more time preparing for this moment of liberation; instead, I was figuring out how to build a relationship in spite of legal and political obstacles -- and developing a healthy skepticism about marriage as an institution. From Harriet Jacobs, Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl (p. 302):
Reader, my story ends with freedom; not in the usual way, with marriage.
(Cross-posted at Legal History Blog)



