A lot of people who have never lived in California don’t quite understand the system of ballot initiatives used there, not to mention in numerous other western states. An important aspect of this system is the provision that laws passed through inititiatives (e.g. Proposition 22) cannot be rescinded by legislative action, and may be repealed only through a subsequent ballot initiative or a judicial ruling…
Thus, the Governator — of whom I am most decidedly not a fan — was absolutely correct in his assertion that the recent marriage bill passed in California is unconstitutional. ANY legislative action which would overturn a ballot initiative is, by definition, unconstitutional in California, even though the original initiative itself may ALSO be unconstitutional. It was not an arbitrary decision in this case, although it may seem ironic to some to have a conservative argue that “juducial activism” IS one of the only appropriate paths to same-sex marriage…
Granted, he might have pursued other alternatives, but his basic (stated) premise was sound. However, the courts have yet to rule on whether Proposition 22 itself is unconstitutional. I believe they will find that it is, which is the only way it will be legally overturned anytime soon…
Sorry. I’m as big a proponent of same-sex marriage as anyone, but it annoys me (and does “the cause” no good whatsoever) when uninformed people start making invalid and irrelevlant arguments about a process they don’t understand…