Trevor just wont give up ...

Lets talk "gay marriage" for a moment - more appropriately termed confederate marriage in my opinion.

Yesterday the New Jersey state senate voted down legislation that would of legalized same sex marriage. Funny enough multiple news agencies carried the story in the following way: "The initiative was narrowly defeated, losing by just 7 votes." What they fail to mention in that "narrow" loss is that there are a mere 28 senators total in that body and the measure lost 14-7. By my math a 2 to 1 margin is a shellacking. However ...

... the true front in this battle has been within the state of California. Or as Arnie would say, "Calee-fornee-ah." Several years ago the CA state legislature passed the legalization of gay marriage, which Swarchenegger swiftly vetoed. His veto was not overridden. In 2000 a binding CA ballot initiative defining marriage between 1 man and 1 woman passed by overwhelming margins. Pro homosexual-marriage activists then sued and the CA Supreme Court (of course) overruled the people's choice, revoking the initiative's legality. A few years later, in the most recent CA vote, another ballot initiative passed, Proposition 8. Having learned their lesson the pro traditional-marriage movement made this initiative an amendment to the CA state constitution - after all even the CA supreme court couldn't find it UNconstitutional then. As I mentioned, it passed. By narrower margins than the first time, but it passed nonetheless. The gay activists again sued - which left even left-wing scholars scratching their head as traditional marriage was now part of the state constitution. The CA high court finally capitulated ... there would be no gay marriage in California as long as the amendment stood. Well, another law suit has been filed. The only document supreme to a state constitution is of course the US Constitution. So now for the last time, in a couple months, the final word on the CA question will be authored. Only it wont just apply to California. This being the Supreme Court of the United States the ruling will apply to the entire nation. In one fell swoop all state laws from sea to shining sea that protect marriage could be summarily swept asunder. And as such we should all monitor this decision closely.

Now this part is particularly interesting. The pro gay marriage side pooled their various resources and got the legal "dream team" of both Ted Olson and David Boeis. If those names ring a vague bell, they should. These were the lead opposing Perry Mason's in the 2000 Bush vs Gore election case. Olson for Bush, Boeis for Gore. They have now teamed up on the side of confederate marriage. The queer part (forgive such an obvious pun), is that Olson became Bush's Solicitor General. Olson's wife, a prominent conservative author and television pundit, was ON THE PLANE that crashed into the PA field on 9/11. As you can imagine he, in his capacity as Solicitor General, provided much legal defense of GITMO, water boarding, etc for the Bush administration in the years he served. By all accounts the man is not only a brilliant lawyer but a rock-rib conservative / constructionist. No one can figure out why he would suddenly align himself with such a clearly non traditional and unconstitutional (in their aims) advocacy group.

At any rate, this will be the biggest case since DC vs Heller. I'll be eyeing it closely.