San Francisco, CA – Yesterday the California Supreme Court, in a 5-0 ruling, rejected the Attorney General’s request to expedite an appeal involving same-sex marriage to the state’s highest court. Earlier this year, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer ruled California’s marriage laws unconstitutional. Mathew D. Staver, President and General Counsel of Liberty Counsel, and Rena Lindevaldsen, Senior Litigation Counsel, represent Campaign for California Families (“Campaign”) in defense of the marriage laws.

Following the litigation last February involving San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, several lawsuits challenging the state’s marriage laws were consolidated in one court before Judge Kramer. The Campaign’s suit against Mayor Newsom was part of the consolidating of cases. In the consolidated cases, the Campaign has been granted the right to defend the marriage laws. Last March, Judge Kramer struck down Proposition 22, a statewide voter legislative initiative that was passed in 2000 by a vote of 61.4%. Proposition 22 declared that marriage is a union of one man and one woman. Following the ruling, the Attorney General requested an expedited appeal to the California Supreme Court, which the Campaign opposed. The Campaign was the only defendant to oppose the expedited appeal. Yesterday’s ruling means that the case will proceed through the normal appeal track at the court of appeals, with the possibility that it may eventually go to the California Supreme Court.

While the litigation is pending, there are two voter initiatives moving forward to amend California’s Constitution to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Liberty Counsel represents VoteYesMarriage.com, the sponsor of one of the amendments. In California, the Attorney General sets forth the title and the summary of the purpose and points of voter initiatives. The Attorney General submitted a biased title and a factually inaccurate summary. Liberty Counsel has filed suit over the ballot title and summary. A hearing on that matter is scheduled in Sacramento on August 18.

“We are pleased that the California Supreme Court agreed not to hear the marriage cases at this time,” said Staver. “Despite the ruling against the marriage laws, the effect of that ruling has been stayed pending the appeal process. There was no need to rush to judgment on California’s marriage laws. Now that the marriage cases will proceed along the normal litigation route, the people will have time to move forward to amend the state Constitution to preserve marriage as one man and one woman.”