SC decision was not about Prop 8

Kip and I had a heated discussion last night...via facebook. Oh, technology. Even the debate has gone virtual.

Anyways, my stance remains supportive of the Supreme Court's decision. THE FORM NOT THE CONTENT. As you'll know, my stance on gay marriage is AT LEAST as strong as the next person's for legalization. One thing I didn't understand about this decision at first, was that it was not even a decision about gay marriage, per se. The courts were deciding on whether the initiative could be used to change the Constitution--in which case, this was not a change to the essence of the Constitution, but an amendment--that's as far as I understood.

The courts MUST NECESSARILY be narrow NOT BROAD in their decisions, so as not to carelessly and accidentally set precedents that don't apply. And in this case, it was exactly that--the SC was deciding on the validity of the initiative. The initiative stripped from its gay marriage tinge. This was a purely structural decision. They had no right to rule on the content of the initiative--that was beyond their scope. That is why everyone already knew BEFORE it was called, that the SC would uphold it.

That is why I feel so bad for the SC judges. They were doing their job, and would get chastised by people who didn't realize that they were not ruling on the validity of the gay marriage ban. They were ruling on the validity of the initiative in changing the Constitution. Two COMPLETELY separate matters.

I know that these judges are for gay marriage--they believe in it, as was evidenced by their overturning the LEGISLATION of same-sex marriage ban as illegal--they had the right to overturn legislation and interpret it as unconstitutional. But an amendment like Prop 8 requires power beyond them.

In sum. The judges were ruling on the validity of the initiative in altering the Constitution. That Prop 8 was involved was coincidental. And I feel sorry for the judges, who to many, now look like bigots, when actually they had to make a tough decision to really separate themselves from their own beliefs to do the job they were hired by the California Public to do.

Might it be noted, many times before has this sort of case gone to court: ruling whether the initiative should have so much power to change the Constitution. The previous courts already declared emphatically that YES, THE POWER OF THE PEOPLE SUSTAINS through the institution of the initiative. To have nullified this prop would have required the SC to set the precedent for future courts to rule NO, THE POWER OF THE PEOPLE, as manifest by the initiative, IS MOOT. NO LONGER APPLIES--KAPUTZ.

So that is why. This issue has NOTHING to do with Prop 8. But a lot regarding Prop 8 was AT STAKE.