Comments on: SCOTUS’s Prop 8 ruling will complicate ballot initiative process On the Case Fri, 15 Jul 2016 20:42:45 +0000 hourly 1 By: MassResident Sun, 14 Jul 2013 16:29:49 +0000 Basically, this ruling puts California’s initiative process in the same position as ours in Massachusetts: The politicians can veto any attempt to limit taxes, etc if they don’t like it. The law in Massachusetts specifies a vote by the legislature with a small minority required to put the issue on the ballot but the legislature has a history of refusing to vote to keep initiatives off the ballot. California’s initiative process is effectively dead. That is the main result of the court’s ruling.

The result of the ruling on the “Defense of Marriage Act” is to deny the Federal government the power to define marriage and throw that back to the states.

I’m not sure why gays consider these rulings victories. They are basically states rights victories. With so many states banning gay marriage in their constitutions, that can’t be good news.

By: EXander Wed, 03 Jul 2013 15:59:25 +0000 The conclusion that Hollingsworth v. Perry will most likely be cited in cases of standing is true enough, but the author refused to acknowledge that most critical finding of the court re standing was that the Prop 8 proponents experiened NO HARM OR INJURY by gay marriages going forward.

There are precious few initiatives in which harm in one way or another is not an effect of an initiative gone awry and land in the courts.

The author has to strain Lexis to find a similar case, and like Prop 8 — the real intent of the initiative was to foster discrimination against a minority, simply because of distaste for that minority.

Gee, a Court that rules for equality instead of voter imposed discrimination. What a terrible “regime” we are forced to live in!