I’m encouraged that several reporters believe the California Supreme Court will, within 90 days, recommend to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that man-woman marriage supporters should have the right to defend Proposition 8 when former state attorney general and current governor Jerry Brown (Democrat) and current attorney general Kamala Harris (Democrat) and former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (liberal Republican) all shirked their constitutional duty to defend the law.

Here’s what I told a TV news reporter today after the hearing:

“This is about the right to defend the will of the voters — and most of the justices on the state high court seemed to understand that. It’s sad that Jerry Brown shirked his duty to defend Prop. 8, which the majority of Californians supported, because they know deep in their hearts that marriage is naturally and exclusively between a man and a woman, a male and a female.”

So be hopeful. All the media accounts I’m reading suggest this positive outcome based on questions and statements from most of the seven justices on the state high court – even liberal, pro-homosexual “marriage” justices, who are used to seeing both sides represented in every hearing.

See this account from long-time court watcher Howard Mintz, reporter with the San Jose Mercury News:

“So,” Justice Ming Chin asked Olson at one point, “you want the federal courts to answer this question with only one side represented?”

At another juncture, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye interjected, “What happens to the state’s interest (if state officials refuse to defend an initiative)? Does it evaporate?”

Justice Joyce Kennard, as usual the most active of questioners, was skeptical of Olson’s position as well. “If we agree with your position, it would appear to me that we would nullify the great power the people have reserved for themselves (to enact ballot initiatives),” she said.

Justice Goodwin Liu, hearing his first case less than a week after being sworn in, was also very active in his debut.

“It seems to me the 9th Circuit has set up a hoop initiative proponents have to jump through,” Liu told Olson. “Given how protective we have been (about the initiative process), why shouldn’t we read the California constitution to offer initiative proponents whatever they need to jump through that hoop?”

Now, if the California Supreme Court rules in favor of Prop. 8 proponents, the three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will receive and consider their advisory vote. While I am very confident that the federal appeals court bench will agree and let the case go forward, I remain highly concerned that the 9th Circuit will ultimately rule against Prop. 8 (see my earlier blog explaining why). If that happens, this incredibly moral case will go to the United States Supreme Court, where Californian Anthony Kennedy, the court’s swing vote, will decide everything.

Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; 
but fornicators and adulterers God will judge.
Hebrews 13:4 NKJV