Perry v. Schwarzenegger stretches into overtime

Don’t expect a ruling on Perry v. Schwarzenegger — the suit against California’s Proposition 8, which bans same-sex marriage — anytime soon, even though courtroom proceedings began on Jan. 11 and testimony wrapped up on Jan. 27.

Closing arguments have been delayed because gay-rights opponents have been trying to get documents from the No-on-8 campaign (for marriage equality) admitted into evidence. The documents in question are being hotly contested because of their potential to jeopardize a central component of the case against Proposition 8. That’s the voter initiative that has prevented the plaintiffs, Perry et al., from marrying.

Supporters of the same-sex marriage ban hope to persuade the judge that same-sex couples have a high degree of access to political power. That strategy could undermine the plaintiffs’ attempts to establish that the ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional based on the Equal Protections Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.

The Yes-on-8 defense team persuaded the court’s magistrate and also the presiding judge, Vaughn Walker, to have the No-on-8 documents brought into evidence. Equality California and the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California also have appealed to try to prevent the admission of the No-on-8 documents.

In hearing Perry v. Schwarzenegger, Walker has generally taken what he describes as a liberal attitude toward the admission of evidence. That basically means erring on the side of admitting evidence that hasn’t necessarily been shown to be highly relevant and later weighing that accordingly in his ruling.

Closing arguments in the case remain to be scheduled.

Read more:

Perry v. Schwarzenegger
Closing arguments have been delayed
California's Prop 8
Equal Protections Clause
Equality California and the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California have also appealed