CITIZENS BETTER PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT THEY ARE PULLING OUT NOW AS
CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE

........................................

California high court expected to rule on same-sex marriageStory
Highlights
California Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality of
Proposition 8

THEY APPARENTLY DO NLT HAVE PRIORITIES TEHRE

- RESEARCH WITHOIUTB CONSENT - CIA WITH ALL ENTARAGE STILL DOEN
NOPTKNOW WHAT THE INFORM CONSENT IT

KIDNAPPING CHILDREN TO NASA AND BRADING THEIR DEVELOPMENT FOR LIFE
PHONYING ALL COURT PROCEDURS TO ACKOMPLISH FAKE PAPAER WORK -A S IF
 THERE WAS   A REASON TO SEPARATE FROM PATENTS AND THAN KIDNAP THE
CHILD
( I AM A WITNES HOW MY CHIDREN SUFFER ALL LIFE FROM PERVERTS AND USA
DOES NOT EVEN HAVE ONE AVENUE THAT CAN ADDRESS THE MATTER)
  THAT IS CONSTITUTIONAL TOO AND PRIORITY TOO - THAT WAY YOU WILL HAVE
INTACT FAMILIES AND NOT TTRANSPLANT UTERUSES WITHOUT A CONSENT

FBI DUE PROCESS IS A CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE WITH ALL THE LAWYERS WORKI G
NOW HOW TO STEAL MY PAYINTING WORLD WIDE - LOST A LITLLE MENPOWER;
\NEEDS A LOT OF HELP.
   THIS IS BIG AND SOMEWHAT DIFFICULT BUT ONLY BECAUSE FBI DOES NOT
COOPERATE.

WAR DECLARATIONS - NEVER STRAIGHT YET.

Voters in November approved ban on same-sex marriage

Opponents say measure violates state, U.S. constitutions

Court also will rule on whether 18,000 same-sex marriages are valid

updated 3 hours, 24 minutes agoNext Article in U.S. ť

 Read VIDEO

(CNN) -- The California Supreme Court is expected to determine the
fate of same-sex marriage in the state on Tuesday as well as the
validity of about 18,000 same-sex marriages.


Proposition 8, which bans same-sex marriage in California, undergoes a
constitutionality test on Tuesday.

 The court will rule on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the
controversial measure banning same-sex marriage that voters approved
in November.

Its opponents want the amendment nullified. They say the proposition
alters California's Constitution and, therefore, under state law, is a
revision that requires a constitutional convention.

Attorneys for the opponents also say the proposition, which removed
the "marriage" label from same-sex unions, effectively deprives same-
sex couples of a fundamental right guaranteed them under the equal-
protection clause in the U.S. Constitution.  Watch what's at stake
with the decision ť

Justices asked many questions when they heard arguments in the case in
March but didn't indicate which way they leaned, instead focusing on
winnowing out each attorney's individual argument on the issue.

Proposition 8 passed with about 52.5 percent of the vote, making
California one of several states to ban same-sex marriage in the
November 4 elections. But unlike others, California had been issuing
marriage licenses to same-sex couples since the state Supreme Court
ruled in May 2008 that the unions were legal.

Along with determining the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the
court will determine whether about 18,000 same-sex marriages conducted
before the ban are still valid.

Don't Miss
Benefits proposed for partners of gay diplomats
(..)
On May 6, same-sex marriage became legal in Maine as Gov. John
Baldacci signed a bill less than an hour after the state Legislature
approved it.

In April, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled unanimously that it is illegal
to discriminate against same-sex couples by denying them the right to
marry. The first gay marriages in the state took place April 27.

The District of Columbia voted May 5 to recognize same-sex marriages
performed elsewhere, though it does not itself give marriage licenses
to same-sex couples.

In April, New York Gov. David Paterson introduced legislation to make
same-sex marriage legal in his state.

New Hampshire's move to legalize same-sex marriage hit a road bump
Wednesday after that state's House of Representatives did not agree to
legislation changes made by the governor.


Both the House and Senate already had approved allowing gay couples to
marry. But Gov. John Lynch, a three-term Democrat, said he would sign
a same-sex marriage bill only if it provides "the strongest and
clearest protections for religious institutions and associations, and
for the individuals working with such institutions."

The House on Wednesday fell two votes short of approving Lynch's
language. The chamber then voted to send the legislation to a
committee to be considered further.
E-mail to a friend