Poor California. The path to equality in that state has been strewn with boulders and brambles, and the quest has put advocates of same-sex marriage through more heart-stopping changes than anyone should have to bear.
It all started back in 2005—a light-year ago in the history of marriage equality—when the California legislature passed marriage equality only to see the bill vetoed by then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. In 2007 the legislature tried again, passed equality again, and again was struck down by the governor’s pen. If at first you don’t succeed, try, try, and try again.
Then, in May 2008, the California Supreme Court said that to deny same-sex couples the right to marry breached the California Constitution. Victory! In June 2008 same-sex couples began to marry, by the thousands—some 18,000.
Enter Protect Marriage, a coalition of anti-equality organizations, waving Proposition 8 in front of referendum-happy California. Voters were asked to approve adding the explicit language to the California Constitution that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” This initiative was funded largely by religious organizations, including the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormons) and the Roman Catholic Church, as well as the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), Focus on the Family, and the American Family Association.
Protect Marriage played on voters’ fears and homophobia, direly warning, “Teaching children about gay marriage will happen here unless we pass Proposition 8. Yes on 8.” The organization canvassed neighborhoods, going door to door, instilling hate and fear in the minds and hearts of people already predisposed to negative feelings about homosexuality. In spite of massive opposition to the measure, Prop. 8 passed with 52 percent of the vote in November 2008.
Imagine the heartbreak for the 18,000 wedded couples all across the state, who had married in good faith during the window of “legality,” and who now worried their marriages would be annulled. Imagine the devastating disappointment for all the loving couples who hoped and planned to marry but would now not have access to the same benefits of marriage as their heterosexual peers. The one silver lining on this ugly raincloud was the California Supreme Court’s upholding the marriages that had occurred during the brief equality honeymoon (in Strauss v. Horton).
Next stop, August 2010, was the case of Perry v. Schwarzenegger, better known as the Prop. 8 trial, in which Judge Vaughn Walker of the U.S. District Court overturned Prop. 8, ruling that it violated both due process and the constitution.
This good news for advocates and same-sex couples was immediately undercut by an appeal to the Ninth District of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals by the dogged opponents of equality, further delaying the fundamental right to marry for thousands of Californians.
In February 2012, the panel ruled 2 to 1 on the unconstitutionality of Prop. 8. Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote: “Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples.” This decision delivered another victory for equality, but sadly continued the stay on same-sex marriages pending further appeals.
As of this writing, it’s going on four years since Californians enjoyed the full freedom to marry. The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is considering a full-panel rehearing of the Prop. 8 case, at the request of its sponsors. Equality advocates are hopeful that when the case gets a rehearing, either by the Ninth Circuit Court or the U.S. Supreme Court, chances are excellent that Prop. 8 will be struck down, once and for all, and California will have full marriage equality. But not without more unjust waiting, discrimination, and undue suffering.
It is against these events that the play 8, by Academy-Award-winning Milk writer Dustin Lance Black, had its world premiere last September in New York, and on March 3, the Los Angeles premiere. 8 is the story of the Prop. 8 trial (Perry v. Schwarzenegger), taken for the most part from actual transcripts of the trial, which by court order was never televised or videoed for public broadcast. The action was brought by two same-sex couples, Kris Perry and Sandy Stier and Jeff Zarrillo and Paul Katami.
The LA premiere was livestreamed on YouTube for anyone with a computer and the inclination to watch it. (NB: The video will be available only for a limited time, so catch it while you can.) It was a star-studded event, which helped draw attention to the show and to the issue. Directed by Rob Reiner and starring George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Martin Sheen, Kevin Bacon, Jane Lynch (as the reprehensible NOM’s Maggie Gallagher), among others, the event raised more than $2 million for the American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER). This premiere was part of a national series of one-night-only staged readings of 8, which AFER and Broadway Impact are sponsoring, to help advance the national conversation about this key civil rights issue. To find out if there’s a performance scheduled near you, click here.
It’s a brilliant thing Black, AFER (of which Reiner is a co-founder), and Broadway Impact have done: first, creating this play, 8, after videos of the trial were not allowed; second, granting the rights to theaters and universities all across the country to do readings just like the one in LA (with less known actors perhaps but with the same compelling message); and third, showing what really happened in that San Francisco courtroom, and how utterly indefensible Prop. 8 has always been, so that Americans and the world can see that, as attorney for the plaintiffs David Boies said, “We put fear and prejudice on trial, and fear and prejudice lost.”
Prop. 8: A Primer and a Play,
Tuo11
8 Mar 2012I myself, do not like mob rule. This nation was set up to be a representative democracy…NOT a democracy. Unfortunately the same people that sneer at the will of the masses for things like marriage equality are the same ones who point to the polls when advocating for taxing the productive members of our society. I think people need to make up their minds and be consistent…either we value the will of the majority on each individual issue or we value the will of the majority in selecting the representatives that will best adhere to the Constitution.
Luci
8 Mar 2012wasnt prop 8 overturned by the california supreme court? Its was clearly unconstitutional.
Fran
8 Mar 2012@Luci – It was upheld by the CA Supreme Court as the people’s right to put a ballot measure changing the constitution on the ballot. It was overturned by a Federal District judge in San Francisco, then that overturn was upheld by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The proponents of Prop 8 have now asked to have the full panel of the 9th circuit hear their case so it’s still in limbo and gay couples are still not allowed to marry in CA.
Luci
8 Mar 2012Thank you Fran! 🙂
Luci
8 Mar 2012…in addition, when has advocating equal marriage rights ever led to gayness. I would think attaching the same level of responsibility to the relationships (potentially) of that “lifestyle” (that has always made it seem like it was some kind of choice, like living a fast paced life style, a country lifestyle or a hollywood lifestlye.. Amazes me) would do more to keep kids from “going gay” there wouldnt be a place to run to to avoid getting married…think of all the capital it could easily generate. Besides the solid ground that marriage places at our feet on our journey of life can be a shelter in a troubled and stormy world. U wanna do something to save marriage try and get the ST8 lifestyle to cherish it and protect it from its true enemy. Easy marriage easy divorce. Make marriage a solid ground institution it was mean to be regardless of the gender of your marriage partner.
Garry
8 Mar 2012How about we mind our own fucking business and focus on our OWN lives and how to improve THEM instead!? I swear, what an asinine thing to debate about… /facedesk
Luci
8 Mar 2012see I think everyone should have rights, or eventually no one will. Frankly thats worth debating. Focusing on oneself solely leads to a world where no one is willing to help another. Rights are good. We should hold on to them and strive to make it equal. Its really the American thing to do. We had this same debate over interracial marriage. Same arguments same piece meal slow legalization of Love. Just sayin.
Garry
8 Mar 2012I beg to differ. Don’t misunderstand my meaning. It shouldn’t be a debate because it shouldn’t even be an issue. Denying anyone the right to marry, whether you personally believe in it or not, is not only none of anyone’s business(but those intending to wed), it’s judgemental and wrong on top of that. So, no. It shouldn’t be debated. It should be dropped altogether and people mind their own affairs.
Reed
8 Mar 2012Awesome article. The history MIGHT have gone even further back (to Proposition 22, in 2000) . . . but that would simply depress me beyond words.
Matt
8 Mar 2012Thank you Rachel for the excellent article and WHOF for sharing!! California needs to move forward!!!!!!!!!
Em
8 Mar 2012Matt, the whole country should move forward….and stay away from the Bible.
Brenda
8 Mar 2012Honestly whenever I read things like this it brings me back to reality because I forget too often that people in this country are allowed to decide what other people can and can’t do and who they can do it with. Parents please teach your children and have them teach their friends who don’t have smart parents, discrimination is wrong, equality is right!!
Tuo11
9 Mar 2012That is because government uses force and coercion when ever it gets involved in…anything. Stay out of my house and my pockets!