Jennifer Drobac, family law expert at the Indiana University School of Law-Indianapolis, said Thursday decision, which allows same-sex couples to regain the right to marry in California, could influence the "changing tide of public opinion" in California -- as increasing numbers of voters and politicians meet more married same-sex couples and find that their marriages are not a threat to marriage generally.
"Social science studies, discussed in great detail in the Perry Prop 8 decision, already highlight that children of same-sex couples grow up just as healthy and well-adjusted as children of heterosexual couples," she said. "The more that folks see that their same-sex married neighbors and friends are just like other families, the more educated and tolerant they become and the less likely future courts will be to contrive ways to distinguish and discriminate against these same-sex families. No one wants to see violations of civil rights; the California Attorney General and Governor Schwarzenegger have made that clear. A stay will put a huge strain on communities and reinforce onerous penalties on same-sex families. A rejection of the stay can be viewed as an attempt to 'do the right thing' while the legal debate continues."
Drobac said the burden for a stay of judgment on appeal is "likelihood of success on the merits of the appeal" and a showing of "irreparable harm if the judgment is not stayed."
"This is a heavy burden for defendant-intervenors to meet," she said.
Other views from IU experts:
Brian Powell IU Professor Brian Powell, who focuses his research on sociology of the family, has talked with more than 2,000 adults nationwide about their attitudes toward same-sex marriages and writes about the topic in a book that will be published in September. He discusses his findings as they relate to Proposition 8 in this media tip: http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/15133.html?emailID=15133.
Deborah Widiss
Deborah Widiss, associate professor at the IU Maurer School of Law, has extensively researched the legal theories and litigation strategies that define how courts should think about the right to marry. Along with Nelson Tebbe of Brooklyn Law School, Widiss advances a new approach to this question in a recent article in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. She talks about recent legal action in California in this media tip: http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/15137.html.
RSS