Ted Olson: Proposition 8 Decision "Judicial Responsibility in its Classic Sense"

Via Think Progress.

In this exchange, Ted Olson, who along with David Boies successfully led the legal challenge that overturned Proposition 8 banning gay marriage in California, told Fox News' Chris Wallace that it's not "judicial activism" when a judge follows the Constitution.

"Where is the right to same-sex marriage in the Constitution?" asked Wallace.

"Where is the right to interracial marriage in the Constitution, Chris?" replied Olson.

"The Supreme Court has looked at marriage and has said that the right to marry is a fundamental right for all citizens. So you call it interracial marriage and then you could prohibit it, no? The Supreme Court said no. The same thing here," Olson argued.

"The judge after hearing three weeks of testimony and full day of closing arguments and listening to experts from all over the world concluded that the denial of the right to marry to these individuals in California hurt them and did not advance the cause of opposite sex marriage," Olson added.

"This is what judges are expected to do. It's not judicial activism. It's judicial responsibility in the classic sense," emphasized Olson. 

As Olson and Boies have demonstrated minority rights cannot be subject to popular votes. 

Olson shot down every single argument that Wallace tried to advance. In the end Wallace conceded, “Mr. Olson, we want to thank you so much for joining us today. We’ll keep following your lawsuit. And I gotta say, after your appearance today, I don’t understand how you ever lost a case in the supreme court, sir.”

 

Prop. 8 Federal Lawsuit Begins, Cue Right-Wing Media Hysteria

This week in a San Francisco Federal District Court, a legal odd couple will be on display. Attorney David Boies, who represented Al Gore before the U.S. Supreme Court in the infamous 2000 case ofBush v. Gore, and conservative attorney Ted Olson, who represented George W. Bush, are joining forces to overturn California's Proposition 8. It will be their contention that the initiative passed by voters in 2008 banning same-sex marriage in the Golden State violates the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the U.S. Constitution, singles out gays and lesbians for a disfavored legal status, and discriminates on the basis of gender and sexual orientation.

Regardless of which side prevails, experts agree the case is likely to be appealed all the way to the highest court in the land.

Cue right-wing media hysteria and homophobia.

There's more...

Diaries

Advertise Blogads