NAACP/Civil Rts Orgs say Court should overturn Prop 8
by bruh3, Sat Nov 15, 2008 at 07:01:04 PM EST
I am not sure if anyone has mentioned this, but the NAACP, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and other organizations (Asian, Mexican and several others) petitioned the California Supreme Court today to overturn Prop 8.
Here's the link:
The reason why this is important is that these boosters the position of gay groups, Democratic legistaslators, the GOP governor and several cities in California that if allowed to stand- Prop 8 would have grearter implications than gay marriage or gay people.
"We would be making a grave mistake to view Proposition 8 as just affecting the LGBT community," said Eva Paterson, president of the Equal Justice Society. "If the Supreme Court allows Proposition 8 to take effect, it would represent a threat to the rights of people of color and all minorities."
This is now the heart of the matter. It is not just that it affects gay people. Its that this is, as I have said comments, a conservative assault on all minorities, gay, people of color or whatever other suspect class that the majority can think of to attack.
This does not lessen the fact that gay rights are critical. This is to point out the law of unintended consequences that no one understood going into the voting booth. This is why outreach was critical. Voters being selfless would be great, but if not, then self interest would have also been a major way to defeat the proposition. This is why we should not have allowed this debate to remain abstract.
The press release continues:
"Proposition 8 contradicts the most basic protection guaranteed by the California Constitution, which is the right to equal protection of the laws," said John Trasviña, President and General Counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. "We can not allow the Constitution to sanction discrimination against one group of people."
"Direct democracy cannot override the California Constitution, which requires more than a majority vote to deprive a minority group of their fundamental rights," said John A. Payton, President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.
"We cannot become a society that picks and chooses who is entitled to equal rights," said Alice A. Huffman, president of the California State NAACP. "We should include all people from all walks of life in the entitlement to all freedoms now enjoyed by the majority of our population As a civil rights advocate, we will continue the fight of eliminating roadblocks to freedom."
"Consistent with core equal protection principles, minority communities must not be stripped of their fundamental rights by bare majority rule," said Karin Wang, Vice-President of Programs for the Asian Pacific American Legal Center. "California went down this path before when the majority population chose to bar interracial marriages involving an unpopular minority: Asian immigrants. The state Constitution exists exactly for this reason - to protect the fundamental rights of minority communities."
This is at the heart of this debate- whether we will allow a bare majority to destroy the basic premise of equal protection analysis or will we require something more substantive and deliberative such as is required with the revision process. This is a conservative assault on greater progressive principles about the rule of law and how it has traditionally worked in this country over the last 200 years, including the role of the judiary in that process. Gays are just the latest skirmish in a decades old battle.