So far I've read as far as you have, and what it seems to boil down to is: California Supreme Court Says, "HA HA, YOU BOTH LOSE."
They were charged with determining whether Prop 8 passed legally. They determined that it did, and that it is virtually meaningless. They may or may not be correct that it is virtually meaningless -- obviously, they did not address the possibility that they might be mistaken in the document ;-) -- but they clearly are not saying "we agree with this proposition or the sentiment behind it".
I do seem to recall, though, that the report from the Iowa decision had a strong tone of "this proposal is a bunch of bullshit, and we have based our decision thusly" whereas this report so far sounds to me like "this proposal has at least enough merit that we're not sitting here laughing at it and throwing it out the window" -- but I think it's really significant that Iowa and California might as well be two different countries for how differently their legal systems operate. Historically speaking, the whole point of the state of California is so that its citizens (including its conservative heterosexual homophobic citizens) share a substantial amount of power with the government. The point of the state of Iowa is...well, cornfields, I think. ;-)
no subject
They were charged with determining whether Prop 8 passed legally. They determined that it did, and that it is virtually meaningless. They may or may not be correct that it is virtually meaningless -- obviously, they did not address the possibility that they might be mistaken in the document ;-) -- but they clearly are not saying "we agree with this proposition or the sentiment behind it".
I do seem to recall, though, that the report from the Iowa decision had a strong tone of "this proposal is a bunch of bullshit, and we have based our decision thusly" whereas this report so far sounds to me like "this proposal has at least enough merit that we're not sitting here laughing at it and throwing it out the window" -- but I think it's really significant that Iowa and California might as well be two different countries for how differently their legal systems operate. Historically speaking, the whole point of the state of California is so that its citizens (including its conservative heterosexual homophobic citizens) share a substantial amount of power with the government. The point of the state of Iowa is...well, cornfields, I think. ;-)