CA Supreme Carlos Moreno Casts Single Vote Against Prop 8

Today's decision by the California Supreme Court in Strauss v Horton—the lawsuits seeking to overturn Prop 8—was decided by a lopsided 6 to 1 majority. Only one justice voted against Prop 8 and believed the rights of minorities should never be enshrined in the constitution by a simple majority vote. That was Justice Carlos R. Moreno.

The summary of Moreno's dissent:

"In my view, the aim of Proposition 8 and all similar initiative measures that seek to alter the California Constitution to deny a fundamental right to a group that has historically been subject to discrimination on the basis of a suspect classification, violates the essence of the equal protection clause of the California Constitution and fundamentally alters its scope and meaning. Such a change cannot be accomplished through the initiative process by a simple amendment to our Constitution enacted by a bare majority of the voters; it must be accomplished, if at all, by a constitutional revision to modify the equal protection clause to protect some, rather than all, similarly situated persons. I would therefore hold that Proposition 8 is not a lawful amendment of the California Constitution."

Moreno was in the majority in California's historic judicial decision that affirmed the right of same-sex couples to marry.

Two weeks ago it was revealed Carlos Moreno was on President Obama's short list to replace the retiring Justice David Soute. This morning the president announced he would nominate Sonia Sotomayor, currently a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, to replace Souter.

Some Background ...
Pro Same-Sex Marriage Carlos Moreno on Obama's SCOTUS List? [R20]

Comments

[alicia banks]

thank god for one sane person...

sanity becomes more of a relic in america each day

tragic!
ab

[Chris]

His dissenting opinion is so very clear and straightforward. I'm particularly impressed where he simply writes "...violates the essence of equal protection.." The notion of revising the constitution so that it excludes a group of people from the equal protection of the law goes against the core of all moral and logical thinking.

[Kevin Perez]

"The notion of revising the constitution so that it excludes a group of people from the equal protection of the law goes against the core of all moral and logical thinking."

Christians would beg to differ!

[Aaron]

Ballot initiatives should not be used to amend the state constitution. California really needs to change this process.

[Jim]

Moreno is courageous for speaking the truth. He most know that such adherence to the principles of morality and justice forever disqualify him from ever holding a higher court position.

[DFS]

another great nugget from Justice Moreno's dissent

“The equal protection clause is therefore, by its nature, inherently countermajoritarian. As a logical matter, it cannot depend on the will of the majority for its enforcement, for it is the will of the majority against which the equal protection clause is designed to protect.”