Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Academic Blogs -> Feminist Law Professors
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Academic
: Feminist Law ProfessorsIf You Live in California, Vote No on Proposition 8
By Ann Bartow
From this Feminist Law Prof co-authored Op-Ed:
Fifty years from now, we will surely look back, with shame, at society’s mistreatment of people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (”LGBT”). It is an unfortunate feature of democracies that the majority can pass laws that disfavor minority groups. This country’s history of legally sanctioned segregation, “separate but [supposedly] equal” education and bans on interracial marriage were products of democratic institutions not yet ready to fully integrate racial minorities into society.
This country, however, was not built on the premise that majority will should rule on all matters; on the contrary, the American legal system was fashioned specifically to protect against the tyranny of the majority. Throughout this country’s history, minority groups have thus counted upon courts to preserve rights guaranteed by our federal and state constitutions. Those documents guarantee to all citizens both due process and equal protection, enduring but also flexible concepts that over time have moved society closer to realizing the guarantee in our Declaration of Independence that “all [people] are created equal.” …
… Historically, California has been at the forefront in protecting minority rights. Even before Brown v. Board of Education, California courts found “separate but equal” education to be inconsistent with state constitutional requirements with regard to its Latino population. Moreover, in Perez v. Sharp, California banned the prohibition on interracial marriage 19 years before the U.S. Supreme Court reached the same conclusion in 1967.
The California Supreme Court’s recent decision extending rights to same-sex couples is in line with a noble history that is relatively progressive compared with some sister states and even the federal government. Should Prop. 8 pass, it would represent a significant departure from that history, and condemn California to a few more years of shameful discrimination against the LGBT community with respect to the important right to marry the person of one’s choice.
Read it in full here.
–Francine Lipman
Full post as published by Feminist Law Professors on October 30, 2008 (boomark / email).
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Dumb California Laws
Stupid Laws in the Sunshine State
Institutionalized Medicaid Recipients
Sue For Right To Choose Where They Live
Microsoft Corp.
allegedly failed to provide adequate access and service to Xbox Live and its subscribers.
California Labor Laws
alleged violations of California labor laws such as overtime pay, discrimination and harassment.
Seattle Mortgage Co Faces California Class Action
Seattle Mortgage Co Faces California Class Action
California Firm Recalls Ready-To-Eat Pork Products
California Firm Recalls Ready-To-Eat Pork Products
California Talent Agency, Be Productions, Faces Federal Class Action
California Talent Agency, Be Productions, Faces Federal Class Action

Look Who is Against Proposition 8
Ballot Bias: Californias Proposition 8 Writes Discrimination Into Law
California Supreme Court to hear Proposition 8 arguments in March
Mobilizing Support for Californias Proposition 8
Glen Lavy: California reaction shows the pretense of tolerance is over
Causes of the Defeat of Proposition 98:
Eduardo Penalver on California Proposition 99 and the Kelo Backlash:









