Air

by on

There's one big difference between the Ninth Circuit's order granting a stay of Judge Walker's decision and Judge Walker's opinion deciding that the decision should go into effect: reasons.

Walker's order is a brief 11 pages, but it sets out the four standards for issuing a stay, and then tests the arguments the Prop. 8 proponents made against those standards: Do the parties who want the stay have a good chance of winning on appeal? Will they be harmed - irreparably harmed - if the stay is not granted? Will other parties also be substantially injured? Is a stay generally in the public interest?

Eleven pages isn't a lot in the legal world, but Judge Walker does take each of these and argue why he thinks the proponents do not make the grade. Anyone can read his ruling and decide if they agree or not.

By contrast, the Ninth Circuit's order consists of two pages, with a single eighteen-word sentence devoted to the stay: "Appellants' motion for a stay of the district Court's order of August 4, 2010 pending appeal is GRANTED." The rest of the order sets an expedited briefing schedule for the first round of the appeal, specifically focusing on the question of standing.
And that's how gay equality proceeds. The people who support us are happy to lay out the reasons why, and engage a debate. But a whole lot of others are content not having to explain themselves. That, in fact, is the best answer to our arguments: silence or sidestepping.

The Ninth Circuit judges don't have to explain themselves in such hurry-up orders, of course, and they are obligated to set out their reasons once they get to the appeal itself. But for right now, we have once again found ourselves stopped short, armed with arguments unresponded to, just hanging in the air.

2 Comments for “Air”

  1. posted by BobN on

    just hanging in the air

    The alternative to the 9th Circuit issuing a stay would have been a SLAP DOWN from the Supreme Court. You know it was already written, just waiting for someone to pull the trigger.

    We won’t know how they rule until they rule, but not issuing a stay would have hurt us.

    And on to another issue which doesn’t seem to be getting any coverage, despite my bringing it up in every comment thread I watch… TELEVISE the appeal!

    Somebody’s got to call for this and I ain’t got no juice.

  2. posted by Jorge on

    Fair point on the Supreme Court bit. Maybe it actually was a political decision.

Comments are closed.