Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Politics The Supremes and R-71
Posted by Eli Sanders on Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 12:14 PM
Looks like the full court will hear the case:
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy on Tuesday referred to the full Supreme Court a request to block the release of names of people who signed petitions seeking to overturn Washington's new "everything but marriage" same-sex domestic partner law...On Monday, Kennedy blocked Washington state officials from releasing the names of people who signed petitions to get Referendum 71 on the ballot.
Share via
1
And yet they talk about activist judges all the time and claim that any court action is ineligible because it's not "the will of the people"? Oh, okay.
2
I live in Seattle, and those ferry districts are bullshit, Sandeep, a goddamned waste of money. Try a different issue because you won't win on that one.
5
But don't forget Kennedy has been a real pioneer on gay rights, the pivotal vote in landmark cases, beginning with Colorado Amendment 2, and in strong unambiguous language going directly to the Bill of Rights; however, he may have reached his limit at "everything but marriage" or he may see the issue of the signatures quite independently of anything to do with the subject of the referendum.
6
This is an out of the ordinary case that deserves to be heard by the full court due to the repercussions that can arise from the inaction on the part of those who have sworn to protect the public from harassment and intimidation. This is not about activistm as much as it is about protection.
8
Let's pause for a moment to consider the dramatic changes that would occur in our Country if the Supreme Court ruled in favor of "anonymous" political speech.
Campaign contributions would likely be considered anonymous political speech. Nobody would ever have to know who is sponsoring legislation, or who is paying for it.
Campaign contributions would likely be considered anonymous political speech. Nobody would ever have to know who is sponsoring legislation, or who is paying for it.
9
Did Justice Kennedy's action send the case to the full court for 1) a decision by the full court on WHETHER to hear arguments in the case, or 2) a DEFINITE full hearing with oral arguments and decision by the Court on the case?
10
Found my answer. The court has NOT decided whether they will hear the case on R-71 petition signatures. They merely extended Justice Kennedy's order to keep the names private until they do decide whether to hear it. Per the Seattle Times:
"The U.S. Supreme Court today ordered that signatures collected to get Referendum 71 on Washington's ballot are to remain sealed until it decides whether to hear an appeal in the case.
Today's action by the high court continues an order Monday by Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy blocking release of the names."
"The U.S. Supreme Court today ordered that signatures collected to get Referendum 71 on Washington's ballot are to remain sealed until it decides whether to hear an appeal in the case.
Today's action by the high court continues an order Monday by Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy blocking release of the names."
11
Loveschild, you're too much. Now, when it serves your purpose, you're for federal government intervention into state business. (Even though getting federal money is not a state right, but a state abiding by it's laws of public records are.)
12
I've already mailed my local reps last urging them to pass legislation in Olympia that all referendum and initiative "rolls" are public record, full stop, but that elections themselves remain private. I urged them to suggest that:
Full name
City of residence
Date of registration to vote
Date and location of signing the petition
Be all searchable on a free, no-registration required public website, in addition to traditional offline methods.
Everyone else should do the same. Get this through in Olympia and off Gregoire's desk, and then see if the anti-democracy extremists have the brass to take THAT to the Supreme Court.
Full name
City of residence
Date of registration to vote
Date and location of signing the petition
Be all searchable on a free, no-registration required public website, in addition to traditional offline methods.
Everyone else should do the same. Get this through in Olympia and off Gregoire's desk, and then see if the anti-democracy extremists have the brass to take THAT to the Supreme Court.
13
This does not actually mean the full court will "hear" the case in the sense that there will be an oral argument and an opinion.
What Kennedy decided on was an emergency application to stay the ruling of the 9th Circuit. All he did was grant it initially, and refer to the full court the question of whether that stay will continue.
To get a stay, a party only has to establish a chance of success on the merits and irreparable harm without a stay. Because public records cannot be unreleased, there is irreparable harm.
The Court is not going to get around to deciding whether there's a free speech right for a long time. And granting a stay does not mean they're eventually going to want to hear the case.
What Kennedy decided on was an emergency application to stay the ruling of the 9th Circuit. All he did was grant it initially, and refer to the full court the question of whether that stay will continue.
To get a stay, a party only has to establish a chance of success on the merits and irreparable harm without a stay. Because public records cannot be unreleased, there is irreparable harm.
The Court is not going to get around to deciding whether there's a free speech right for a long time. And granting a stay does not mean they're eventually going to want to hear the case.
14
Gay Americans seem to be on the forefront of the Civil Rights struggle now. I don't recall ANY other minotiry group's civil rights battles like the ones we have seen over the past 15 years. I think the Gay Civil Rights struggle is very very different from any other experience as it's a constant work out for the courts and shows the deep seated hatred of much of the American population as they vote to write discrimination into states' constitutions. With each court case and with each lost vote, it becomes clearer that Gay Americans are doing more to further the cause of Civil equality than any other minority group in American history. More light is being shed on the courts, the voting process, the religious bigots, the population at large, the law makers state and Federal, and the media.
15
14
good god are you 20 years old?
read about the "real" Civil Rights Movement in the 50's and 60's.
it will give you goosebumps and teach you a thing or two (or twenty...)
the gays have nothing to come close to the moral leadership of MLK and his cohorts-
and you have no concept of discrimination and animosity.
the gays are pampered yuppie brats whining for pot and bar crawling for family medical insurance coverage, waging the 'good fight' in courts with a cadre of arrogant clueless lawyers with really bad haircuts.
good god are you 20 years old?
read about the "real" Civil Rights Movement in the 50's and 60's.
it will give you goosebumps and teach you a thing or two (or twenty...)
the gays have nothing to come close to the moral leadership of MLK and his cohorts-
and you have no concept of discrimination and animosity.
the gays are pampered yuppie brats whining for pot and bar crawling for family medical insurance coverage, waging the 'good fight' in courts with a cadre of arrogant clueless lawyers with really bad haircuts.
16
Hatred does not deserve privacy, whether it wears a white hood or hides behind a hatred of our State Constitution.
We do have strong privacy rights for certain things, in our state, but not for petition signatures, addresses, and names.
We do have strong privacy rights for certain things, in our state, but not for petition signatures, addresses, and names.
17
#16 not at all, you're totally wrong, political history fail on your part. I don't recall reading about state constitutional amendments banning Black Americans for being Black. I don't recall reading about efforts to write a federal constitutional amendment to strip Black Americans of the civil rights enjoyed by White citizens, and that infact Black citizens enjoyed. I don't recall reading about Jews being denied the same rights as Catholics. And exactly what is this "Moral Leadership" you refer to?
19
...HEY , hey
The Tacoma judge, Mr. Settle, framed his decision as a perfect set up for the US Supremes .... smart jurist.
And remember in the 1985 US Supreme full court decision ruling protecting lefty political parties from disclosure, the court set a low standard of proof. Very low.
And that is why FSP got a good ruling from federal Judge Dwyer protcting their donor lists from disclosure. That ruling quoted the full court ruling.
Will the full court take it up - my prediction, yes. That has been my feeling for weeks.
Tailor made for the full court, full of giant ramifications in many campaign/political settings, affecting all states and all voters, citizens, and petition matters.
Washington is not alone having enshrined initiative and referendum in its governing process.
Privacy and the right to is also a big issue in this era and the internet had evaporated much of our sense of privacy.... some feel in an over reaching fashion.
Remember the beginning of all this was the plan to post on line all the names of signers as has been done in other places. Petition drives now are not just a file of papers in a dusty cabinet somewhere in Olympia.
Chad
The Tacoma judge, Mr. Settle, framed his decision as a perfect set up for the US Supremes .... smart jurist.
And remember in the 1985 US Supreme full court decision ruling protecting lefty political parties from disclosure, the court set a low standard of proof. Very low.
And that is why FSP got a good ruling from federal Judge Dwyer protcting their donor lists from disclosure. That ruling quoted the full court ruling.
Will the full court take it up - my prediction, yes. That has been my feeling for weeks.
Tailor made for the full court, full of giant ramifications in many campaign/political settings, affecting all states and all voters, citizens, and petition matters.
Washington is not alone having enshrined initiative and referendum in its governing process.
Privacy and the right to is also a big issue in this era and the internet had evaporated much of our sense of privacy.... some feel in an over reaching fashion.
Remember the beginning of all this was the plan to post on line all the names of signers as has been done in other places. Petition drives now are not just a file of papers in a dusty cabinet somewhere in Olympia.
Chad
20
@19
Either the process must be transparent, or the process must go.
I either have the right to confirm manually if my signature did or did not appear on an initiative or referendum, along with the specific date and place of my signing, or I cannot trust the system. How do I know my name wasn't erroneously used to put R-71 on the ballot? I want to verify it's not, because I didn't. I can't. The system is abusive to everyone in my position, as of 10/20/09.
Make it fully transparent, or lose it, and the entire political process moves to the state legislation level like it is in other states.
Either the process must be transparent, or the process must go.
I either have the right to confirm manually if my signature did or did not appear on an initiative or referendum, along with the specific date and place of my signing, or I cannot trust the system. How do I know my name wasn't erroneously used to put R-71 on the ballot? I want to verify it's not, because I didn't. I can't. The system is abusive to everyone in my position, as of 10/20/09.
Make it fully transparent, or lose it, and the entire political process moves to the state legislation level like it is in other states.
21
Just curious... how is this relevant to the fact that the people of Washington are voting on my rights RIGHT NOW? The Stranger and ERW have worked hand-in-hand to bash any grassroots lgbt work and yet they insist on distracting people from the issues and from voting to approve. No wonder people are confused how to vote. For months, we've every fucking thing about this referendum (good signatures/bad signatures, lawsuits, non-registered voters, appeals, release names, ad nauseum) EXCEPT that it's about lgbt rights and that we should vote to Approve.
22
@17. Sargon Bighorn. Wow. You really don't get it at all. Start with the 3/5ths Compromise on slavery, and work your way up from there. Jim Crow wasn't a guy, it was a set of laws that specifically denied civil rights. We had to change the Constitution to GIVE black people rights. The original setup was more a case of "you have no rights until we enumerate them", rather than "you have rights we want to take away".
The "Moral Leadership" is anyone more respectable than Sullivan and Savage. Still waiting.....
The "Moral Leadership" is anyone more respectable than Sullivan and Savage. Still waiting.....
24
Update: The full court heard the case and voted 8-1 to keep Judge Settle's preliminary injunction in force. Only Justice Stevens agreed with the 9th Circuit.
25
Maybe the Stranger should drop its holier than thou attitude and investigate why Washington Families Standing Together has raised more than 4 times as much as the bigots have for Referendum 71 and yet people are still confused on how to vote. Maybe phone banking and canvassing are NOT the way to win this. After all, that's exactly how the No on 8 campaign lost on Prop 8.
WAFST:
Cash*: $1,186,026.90
In-Kind: $557,526.78
Expenditures: $558,362.32
Anonymous: $1,034.00
Loans: $0.00
Misc: $2,470.33
Small Contr: $18,316.69
HRC Referendum 71 PAC:
Cash*: $76,871.00
In-Kind: $2,361.00
Expenditures: $75,295.00
Anonymous: $0.00
Loans: $0.00
Misc: $0.00
Small Contr: $245.00
==================================
Vote Reject on R-71:
Cash*: $200,040.53
In-Kind: $0.00
Expenditures: $100,000.00
Anonymous: $0.00
Loans: $0.00
Misc: $0.00
Small Contr: $0.00
Protect Marriage WA:
Cash*: $73,209.47
In-Kind: $144,518.26
Expenditures: $61,036.87
Anonymous: $0.00
Loans: $1,900.00
Misc: $0.00
Small Contr: $6,734.60
WAFST:
Cash*: $1,186,026.90
In-Kind: $557,526.78
Expenditures: $558,362.32
Anonymous: $1,034.00
Loans: $0.00
Misc: $2,470.33
Small Contr: $18,316.69
HRC Referendum 71 PAC:
Cash*: $76,871.00
In-Kind: $2,361.00
Expenditures: $75,295.00
Anonymous: $0.00
Loans: $0.00
Misc: $0.00
Small Contr: $245.00
==================================
Vote Reject on R-71:
Cash*: $200,040.53
In-Kind: $0.00
Expenditures: $100,000.00
Anonymous: $0.00
Loans: $0.00
Misc: $0.00
Small Contr: $0.00
Protect Marriage WA:
Cash*: $73,209.47
In-Kind: $144,518.26
Expenditures: $61,036.87
Anonymous: $0.00
Loans: $1,900.00
Misc: $0.00
Small Contr: $6,734.60
Most Commented on Slog
-
Stephen Fry v. the Catholic Church by Dan Savage
-
Neologism Needed by Dan Savage
-
Palin's Cheat Sheet by Dan Savage
-
Straight Up by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: The Toilet Brush Off by Dan Savage
-
Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father by Dan Savage
-
Tea Party Crowd Believes That Only Good Spellers Should Vote by Dan Savage
-
Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father by Dan Savage
-
The Green Police Super Bowl Commercial by Charles Mudede
-
Was This On Slog Yesterday? by Dan Savage
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (25) RSS