Calif. Supreme Court to Allow Prop8 Supporters to Defend Measure

[DC at the Ridge]

Originally Posted by Gibbous Moon

Uh huh...

You like the decision. So do I. It's really not that big of a deal admitting you care about it.

Well... not to some of us, anyway...

I'm sure you'll reply to this thread, yet again, assuring us all that you keep replying because... well, because you really don't care about anything except the fact that 'the people' are allowed to stand up for what they believe (even though had you read and understood the decision you'd realize that 'the people' have no standing at all, only the official proponents of Prop 8, and if they chose to cut bait at this point then 'the people' would have no recourse whatsoever).

But, whatever! You don't care at all! (about this subject upon which you've posted frequently, in this thread and others...)

You seem to think that a court defining who has "standing" in a case as a denial of rights to the general public. That's untrue. Just because people have to demonstrate to the court their interest in a particular issue is not a denial of "the people's" rights.

In this particular matter, Proposition 8 was initiated by "the people". Was every person a supporter of Proposition 8? No. And yet nonetheless, the law wasn't initiated by the legislature, it was initiated by citizens who were interested in a particular issue and who worked to present their case to the general public, and to get it on the ballot, and to get enough other voters to support it that it won. That's a law initiated by the people.

The law did not please everyone. So some of "the people" challenged it in court, and the court found the law Unconstitutional. "The people" who favor the law want to challenge that decision, the state didn't want to challenge that decision, and the court ruled that "the people" who favor the law can pursue legal appeal. In defining standing, they aren't taking away any rights from "the people". The persons with standing, are members of the public who happen to have taken a leadership role in regards to this people's initiative. The persons with standing here are not government representatives. They represent "the people" who supported this piece of legislation that was initiated by members of the general public, not members of the state legislature.

You are parsing the legal concept of "standing" as if it is a denial of rights, when it is not. "Standing" is a way of controlling the number of lawsuits that get beyond initial filing, to prevent frivolous lawsuits, and it also serves the court in building a foundation for the lawsuit, showing that harm or injury is indeed a factor and who is affected.

[afoigrokerkok]

I fail to understand the logic of some people. With everything else that's going on, do they really not have anything better to worry about?

Honestly people, just let California allow gay marriage and start focusing on other things.