Prop 8 and the Televised Debate

On January 11, Judge Vaughn Walker, of the U.S. 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals, will open hearings on the constitutionality of California's law banning the rights of gay people to marry. He has decided to allow the trial to be publicized, based on public opinion.

Proposition 8, commonly known as Prop 8, is a law enacted by popular vote as a ballot initiative in the 2008 elections. It amended the California Constitution to state that "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." For some gay people, their dream of marriage ended. For married gay people, it created uncertainty. Prop 8 was not retroactive.

In so doing, the ballot measure usurped the California State Supreme Court's earlier decision that banning gay marriage was unconstitutional. It also garnered national attention as the first law enacted that specifically banned a prescribed civil right to a particular group of people. The federal court's decision in this appeal will have far reaching implications.

Judge Vaughn Walker has decided to take public commentary, until Friday, January 8, regarding televising the court proceedings. Gay activists across the country have launched campaigns to motivate the public to tell Judge Walker to allow the hearings to be televised, hoping that public exposure will aid their cause. They may be right.

The U.S. public has a knee-jerk reaction to injustice. It just doesn't sit right with them, regardless of which side of the political spectrum they may come from. This could play very well for gays and gay advocates if Judge Walker allows this trial to be televised. If aspects of the trial are aired for the U.S. public viewing audience to see, public opinion could potentially influence the decision that is made. That is why the opponents of the appeal are also highly motivated to keep the cameras out of the courtroom in this case.

In historic terms, this is a civil rights case that could set the tone for the next decade, and perhaps beyond. Should the court decide that Prop 8 is unconstitutional, it will mean that other states' laws regarding the definition of marriage will stand on shakier ground, and will most likely open them to further challenge. But even more important, it will bring into challenge the Defense Of Marriage act, enacted by Congress and signed by then President Bill Clinton that states that no state need recognize another state's marriage if it isn't between a man and a woman. Further, the DOMA, Defense Of Marriage Act, defining marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman could be challenged under the aegis of state sovereignty to acknowledge agreements between states.

Allowing cameras into Judge Walker's court, at his behest, will not harm the judicial process. If we are to truly address the issue, public discourse and observation of the process will not diminish our ability to come to a decision to this socially difficult question. The American public is well aware of the difficulties of democracy, and they embrace it. You can influence Judge Walker's decision directly by visiting a number of websites, including

http://www.couragecampaign.org/TeleviseTheTrial

and

http://www.defenseofmarriage.com